Cargando…
Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data
RNA-Seq made possible the global identification of fusion transcripts, i.e. “chimeric RNAs”. Even though various software packages have been developed to serve this purpose, they behave differently in different datasets provided by different developers. It is important for both users, and developers...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26862001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep21597 |
_version_ | 1782415095607853056 |
---|---|
author | Kumar, Shailesh Vo, Angie Duy Qin, Fujun Li, Hui |
author_facet | Kumar, Shailesh Vo, Angie Duy Qin, Fujun Li, Hui |
author_sort | Kumar, Shailesh |
collection | PubMed |
description | RNA-Seq made possible the global identification of fusion transcripts, i.e. “chimeric RNAs”. Even though various software packages have been developed to serve this purpose, they behave differently in different datasets provided by different developers. It is important for both users, and developers to have an unbiased assessment of the performance of existing fusion detection tools. Toward this goal, we compared the performance of 12 well-known fusion detection software packages. We evaluated the sensitivity, false discovery rate, computing time, and memory usage of these tools in four different datasets (positive, negative, mixed, and test). We conclude that some tools are better than others in terms of sensitivity, positive prediction value, time consumption and memory usage. We also observed small overlaps of the fusions detected by different tools in the real dataset (test dataset). This could be due to false discoveries by various tools, but could also be due to the reason that none of the tools are inclusive. We have found that the performance of the tools depends on the quality, read length, and number of reads of the RNA-Seq data. We recommend that users choose the proper tools for their purpose based on the properties of their RNA-Seq data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4748267 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47482672016-02-17 Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data Kumar, Shailesh Vo, Angie Duy Qin, Fujun Li, Hui Sci Rep Article RNA-Seq made possible the global identification of fusion transcripts, i.e. “chimeric RNAs”. Even though various software packages have been developed to serve this purpose, they behave differently in different datasets provided by different developers. It is important for both users, and developers to have an unbiased assessment of the performance of existing fusion detection tools. Toward this goal, we compared the performance of 12 well-known fusion detection software packages. We evaluated the sensitivity, false discovery rate, computing time, and memory usage of these tools in four different datasets (positive, negative, mixed, and test). We conclude that some tools are better than others in terms of sensitivity, positive prediction value, time consumption and memory usage. We also observed small overlaps of the fusions detected by different tools in the real dataset (test dataset). This could be due to false discoveries by various tools, but could also be due to the reason that none of the tools are inclusive. We have found that the performance of the tools depends on the quality, read length, and number of reads of the RNA-Seq data. We recommend that users choose the proper tools for their purpose based on the properties of their RNA-Seq data. Nature Publishing Group 2016-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4748267/ /pubmed/26862001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep21597 Text en Copyright © 2016, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Article Kumar, Shailesh Vo, Angie Duy Qin, Fujun Li, Hui Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title | Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title_full | Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title_fullStr | Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title_short | Comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from RNA-Seq data |
title_sort | comparative assessment of methods for the fusion transcripts detection from rna-seq data |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26862001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep21597 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kumarshailesh comparativeassessmentofmethodsforthefusiontranscriptsdetectionfromrnaseqdata AT voangieduy comparativeassessmentofmethodsforthefusiontranscriptsdetectionfromrnaseqdata AT qinfujun comparativeassessmentofmethodsforthefusiontranscriptsdetectionfromrnaseqdata AT lihui comparativeassessmentofmethodsforthefusiontranscriptsdetectionfromrnaseqdata |