Cargando…
A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer
Motivation: With the advent of relatively affordable high-throughput technologies, DNA sequencing of cancers is now common practice in cancer research projects and will be increasingly used in clinical practice to inform diagnosis and treatment. Somatic (cancer-only) single nucleotide variants (SNVs...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753564/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23842810 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt375 |
_version_ | 1782281857869545472 |
---|---|
author | Roberts, Nicola D. Kortschak, R. Daniel Parker, Wendy T. Schreiber, Andreas W. Branford, Susan Scott, Hamish S. Glonek, Garique Adelson, David L. |
author_facet | Roberts, Nicola D. Kortschak, R. Daniel Parker, Wendy T. Schreiber, Andreas W. Branford, Susan Scott, Hamish S. Glonek, Garique Adelson, David L. |
author_sort | Roberts, Nicola D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Motivation: With the advent of relatively affordable high-throughput technologies, DNA sequencing of cancers is now common practice in cancer research projects and will be increasingly used in clinical practice to inform diagnosis and treatment. Somatic (cancer-only) single nucleotide variants (SNVs) are the simplest class of mutation, yet their identification in DNA sequencing data is confounded by germline polymorphisms, tumour heterogeneity and sequencing and analysis errors. Four recently published algorithms for the detection of somatic SNV sites in matched cancer–normal sequencing datasets are VarScan, SomaticSniper, JointSNVMix and Strelka. In this analysis, we apply these four SNV calling algorithms to cancer–normal Illumina exome sequencing of a chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patient. The candidate SNV sites returned by each algorithm are filtered to remove likely false positives, then characterized and compared to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of each SNV calling algorithm. Results: Comparing the candidate SNV sets returned by VarScan, SomaticSniper, JointSNVMix2 and Strelka revealed substantial differences with respect to the number and character of sites returned; the somatic probability scores assigned to the same sites; their susceptibility to various sources of noise; and their sensitivities to low-allelic-fraction candidates. Availability: Data accession number SRA081939, code at http://code.google.com/p/snv-caller-review/ Contact: david.adelson@adelaide.edu.au Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3753564 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37535642013-08-27 A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer Roberts, Nicola D. Kortschak, R. Daniel Parker, Wendy T. Schreiber, Andreas W. Branford, Susan Scott, Hamish S. Glonek, Garique Adelson, David L. Bioinformatics Review Motivation: With the advent of relatively affordable high-throughput technologies, DNA sequencing of cancers is now common practice in cancer research projects and will be increasingly used in clinical practice to inform diagnosis and treatment. Somatic (cancer-only) single nucleotide variants (SNVs) are the simplest class of mutation, yet their identification in DNA sequencing data is confounded by germline polymorphisms, tumour heterogeneity and sequencing and analysis errors. Four recently published algorithms for the detection of somatic SNV sites in matched cancer–normal sequencing datasets are VarScan, SomaticSniper, JointSNVMix and Strelka. In this analysis, we apply these four SNV calling algorithms to cancer–normal Illumina exome sequencing of a chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patient. The candidate SNV sites returned by each algorithm are filtered to remove likely false positives, then characterized and compared to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of each SNV calling algorithm. Results: Comparing the candidate SNV sets returned by VarScan, SomaticSniper, JointSNVMix2 and Strelka revealed substantial differences with respect to the number and character of sites returned; the somatic probability scores assigned to the same sites; their susceptibility to various sources of noise; and their sensitivities to low-allelic-fraction candidates. Availability: Data accession number SRA081939, code at http://code.google.com/p/snv-caller-review/ Contact: david.adelson@adelaide.edu.au Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Oxford University Press 2013-09-15 2013-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3753564/ /pubmed/23842810 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt375 Text en © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Roberts, Nicola D. Kortschak, R. Daniel Parker, Wendy T. Schreiber, Andreas W. Branford, Susan Scott, Hamish S. Glonek, Garique Adelson, David L. A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title | A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title_full | A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title_fullStr | A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title_short | A comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic SNV detection in cancer |
title_sort | comparative analysis of algorithms for somatic snv detection in cancer |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753564/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23842810 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt375 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT robertsnicolad acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT kortschakrdaniel acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT parkerwendyt acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT schreiberandreasw acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT branfordsusan acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT scotthamishs acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT glonekgarique acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT adelsondavidl acomparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT robertsnicolad comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT kortschakrdaniel comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT parkerwendyt comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT schreiberandreasw comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT branfordsusan comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT scotthamishs comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT glonekgarique comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer AT adelsondavidl comparativeanalysisofalgorithmsforsomaticsnvdetectionincancer |