Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cell health: CERES vs. Grit #1

Open
jt-neal opened this issue Oct 16, 2020 · 9 comments
Open

Cell health: CERES vs. Grit #1

jt-neal opened this issue Oct 16, 2020 · 9 comments

Comments

@jt-neal
Copy link

jt-neal commented Oct 16, 2020

CRISPR_(Avana)_Public_20Q3_subsetted (1).xlsx

@gwaybio
Copy link
Member

gwaybio commented Oct 19, 2020

got it! If possible, can you point me to the full resource?

i.e. - not subset by cell line or 230 gene set

@gwaybio
Copy link
Member

gwaybio commented Oct 19, 2020

@gwaybio
Copy link
Member

gwaybio commented Oct 19, 2020

@gwaybio gwaybio changed the title CERES scores for genes in 230 gene set Cell health: CERES vs. Grit Oct 20, 2020
@gwaybio
Copy link
Member

gwaybio commented Oct 20, 2020

In #2 I add the code, data, and figures to compare grit and CERES scores in the Cell Health project.

Results

cell_health_grit_ceres_comparison

cell_health_barcode_control_comparison

Interpretation

Generally, Grit and CERES scores are negatively correlated. A low CERES score indicates high gene essentiality, whereas a high Grit score indicates difference to NT control and reproducibility to the same CRISPR gene target. We do see quite a bit of off diagonal in the top figure. I think this is a cool result, suggesting that high Grit can detect signal not associated with essentiality (i.e. not necessarily a viability phenotype)

The two facets of the top figure represent the control used in the grit calculation. Specifically:

{
  'cutting_control': ['Chr2-1', 'Chr2-4', 'Chr2-5', 'Chr2-2', 'Luc-1', 'LacZ-3', 'Luc-2', 'LacZ-2', 'Chr2-3', 'Chr2-6'],
 'perturbation_control': ['EMPTY']
}

see broadinstitute/cell-health#2 for more discussion about these control perturbations.

It is also interesting to see the majority of the points in the bottom figure fall above the dotted red line. This means that grit is generally higher using an Empty control than a cutting control. This makes sense since the perturbations cut, and therefore would form profiles that are closer to the cutting controls.

@jt-neal
Copy link
Author

jt-neal commented Oct 21, 2020

sorry for the naive question, but how do I access the raw data for Cell Health grit scores?

@jt-neal
Copy link
Author

jt-neal commented Oct 22, 2020

in this file what does the "barcode_control" column indicate? It has both "cutting control" and "perturbation control" rows for every guide.

@gwaybio
Copy link
Member

gwaybio commented Oct 22, 2020

I used two different types of controls in the grit calculation - guides that cut, and no treatment. I indicate the specific guides used in the "Interpretation" section above.

@jt-neal
Copy link
Author

jt-neal commented Oct 22, 2020

ah - now I understand - thanks!

gwaybio added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 30, 2021
Add cell health prediction pipeline on grit-informed aggregated profiles
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants