Beyond Normalization: Incorporating Scale Uncertainty in Microbiome and Gene Expression Analysis.

Though statistical normalizations are often used in differential abundance or differential expression analysis to address sample-to-sample variation in sequencing depth, we offer a better alternative. These normalizations often make strong, implicit assumptions about the scale of biological systems (e.g., microbial load). Thus, analyses are susceptible to even slight errors in these assumptions, leading to elevated rates of false positives and false negatives. We introduce scale models as a generalization of normalizations so researchers can model potential errors in assumptions about scale. By incorporating scale models into the popular ALDEx2 software, we enhance the reproducibility of analyses while often drastically decreasing false positive and false negative rates. We design scale models that are guaranteed to reduce false positives compared to equivalent normalizations. At least in the context of ALDEx2, we recommend using scale models over normalizations in all practical situations.

From Pre-test and Post-test Probabilities to Medical Decision Making.

Background: A central goal of modern evidence-based medicine is the development of simple and easy to use tools that help clinicians integrate quantitative information into medical decision-making. The Bayesian Pre-test/Post-test Probability (BPP) framework is arguably the most well known of such tools and provides a formal approach to quantify diagnostic uncertainty given the result of a medical test or the presence of a clinical sign. Yet, clinical decision-making goes beyond quantifying diagnostic uncertainty and requires that that uncertainty be balanced against the various costs and benefits associated with each possible decision. Despite increasing attention in recent years, simple and flexible approaches to quantitative clinical decision-making have remained elusive. Methods: We extend the BPP framework using concepts of Bayesian Decision Theory. By integrating cost, we can expand the BPP framework to allow for clinical decision-making. Results: We develop a simple quantitative framework for binary clinical decisions (e.g., action/inaction, treat/no-treat, test/no-test). Let p be the pre-test or post-test probability that a patient has disease. We show that r*=(1-p)/p represents a critical value called a decision boundary. In terms of the relative cost of under- to over-acting, r* represents the critical value at which action and inaction are equally optimal. We demonstrate how this decision boundary can be used at the bedside through case studies and as a research tool through a reanalysis of a recent study which found widespread misestimation of pre-test and post-test probabilities among clinicians. Conclusions: Our approach is so simple that it should be thought of as a core, yet previously overlooked, part of the BPP framework. Unlike prior approaches to quantitative clinical decision-making, our approach requires little more than a hand-held calculator, is applicable in almost any setting where the BPP framework can be used, and excels in situations where the costs and benefits associated with a particular decision are patient-specific and difficult to quantify.

Addressing erroneous scale assumptions in microbe and gene set enrichment analysis.

By applying Differential Set Analysis (DSA) to sequence count data, researchers can determine whether groups of microbes or genes are differentially enriched. Yet sequence count data suffer from a scale limitation: these data lack information about the scale (i.e., size) of the biological system under study, leading some authors to call these data compositional (i.e., proportional). In this article, we show that commonly used DSA methods that rely on normalization make strong, implicit assumptions about the unmeasured system scale. We show that even small errors in these scale assumptions can lead to positive predictive values as low as 9%. To address this problem, we take three novel approaches. First, we introduce a sensitivity analysis framework to identify when modeling results are robust to such errors and when they are suspect. Unlike standard benchmarking studies, this framework does not require ground-truth knowledge and can therefore be applied to both simulated and real data. Second, we introduce a statistical test that provably controls Type-I error at a nominal rate despite errors in scale assumptions. Finally, we discuss how the impact of scale limitations depends on a researcher's scientific goals and provide tools that researchers can use to evaluate whether their goals are at risk from erroneous scale assumptions. Overall, the goal of this article is to catalyze future research into the impact of scale limitations in analyses of sequence count data; to illustrate that scale limitations can lead to inferential errors in practice; yet to also show that rigorous and reproducible scale reliant inference is possible if done carefully.

Changes in the Type 2 diabetes gut mycobiome associate with metformin treatment across populations.

The human gut teems with a diverse ecosystem of microbes, yet non-bacterial portions of that community are overlooked in studies of metabolic diseases firmly linked to gut bacteria. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) associates with compositional shifts in the gut bacterial microbiome and fungal mycobiome, but whether T2D and/or pharmaceutical treatments underpin the community change is unresolved. To differentiate these effects, we curated a gut mycobiome cohort to-date spanning 1,000 human samples across 5 countries and a murine experimental model. We use Bayesian multinomial logistic normal models to show that metformin and T2D both associate with shifts in the relative abundance of distinct gut fungi. T2D associates with shifts in the Saccharomycetes and Sordariomycetes fungal classes, while the genera Fusarium and Tetrapisipora most consistently associate with metformin treatment. We confirmed the impact of metformin on individual gut fungi by administering metformin to healthy mice. Thus, metformin and T2D account for subtle, but significant and distinct variation in the gut mycobiome across human populations. This work highlights for the first time that oral pharmaceuticals can confound associations of gut fungi with T2D and warrants the need to consider pharmaceutical interventions in investigations of linkages between metabolic diseases and gut microbial inhabitants.