Cargando…

Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency

In the past decade, treatments for tumors have made remarkable progress, such as the successful clinical application of targeted therapies. Nowadays, targeted therapies are based primarily on the detection of mutations, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) plays an important role in relevant clinica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Zixi, Yuan, Yuchen, Chen, Xiaoshi, Chen, Jiayun, Lin, Shudai, Li, Xingsong, Du, Hongli
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7044309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32103116
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60559-5
_version_ 1783501542781878272
author Chen, Zixi
Yuan, Yuchen
Chen, Xiaoshi
Chen, Jiayun
Lin, Shudai
Li, Xingsong
Du, Hongli
author_facet Chen, Zixi
Yuan, Yuchen
Chen, Xiaoshi
Chen, Jiayun
Lin, Shudai
Li, Xingsong
Du, Hongli
author_sort Chen, Zixi
collection PubMed
description In the past decade, treatments for tumors have made remarkable progress, such as the successful clinical application of targeted therapies. Nowadays, targeted therapies are based primarily on the detection of mutations, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) plays an important role in relevant clinical research. The mutation frequency is a major problem in tumor mutation detection and increasing sequencing depth is a widely used method to improve mutation calling performance. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the effect of different sequencing depth and mutation frequency as well as mutation calling tools. In this study, Strelka2 and Mutect2 tools were used in detecting the performance of 30 combinations of sequencing depth and mutation frequency. Results showed that the precision rate kept greater than 95% in most of the samples. Generally, for higher mutation frequency (≥20%), sequencing depth ≥200X is sufficient for calling 95% mutations; for lower mutation frequency (≤10%), we recommend improving experimental method rather than increasing sequencing depth. Besides, according to our results, although Strelka2 and Mutect2 performed similarly, the former performed slightly better than the latter one at higher mutation frequency (≥20%), while Mutect2 performed better when the mutation frequency was lower than 10%. Besides, Strelka2 was 17 to 22 times faster than Mutect2 on average. Our research will provide a useful and comprehensive guideline for clinical genomic researches on somatic mutation identification through systematic performance comparison among different sequencing depths and mutation frequency.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7044309
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70443092020-03-04 Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency Chen, Zixi Yuan, Yuchen Chen, Xiaoshi Chen, Jiayun Lin, Shudai Li, Xingsong Du, Hongli Sci Rep Article In the past decade, treatments for tumors have made remarkable progress, such as the successful clinical application of targeted therapies. Nowadays, targeted therapies are based primarily on the detection of mutations, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) plays an important role in relevant clinical research. The mutation frequency is a major problem in tumor mutation detection and increasing sequencing depth is a widely used method to improve mutation calling performance. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the effect of different sequencing depth and mutation frequency as well as mutation calling tools. In this study, Strelka2 and Mutect2 tools were used in detecting the performance of 30 combinations of sequencing depth and mutation frequency. Results showed that the precision rate kept greater than 95% in most of the samples. Generally, for higher mutation frequency (≥20%), sequencing depth ≥200X is sufficient for calling 95% mutations; for lower mutation frequency (≤10%), we recommend improving experimental method rather than increasing sequencing depth. Besides, according to our results, although Strelka2 and Mutect2 performed similarly, the former performed slightly better than the latter one at higher mutation frequency (≥20%), while Mutect2 performed better when the mutation frequency was lower than 10%. Besides, Strelka2 was 17 to 22 times faster than Mutect2 on average. Our research will provide a useful and comprehensive guideline for clinical genomic researches on somatic mutation identification through systematic performance comparison among different sequencing depths and mutation frequency. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7044309/ /pubmed/32103116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60559-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Chen, Zixi
Yuan, Yuchen
Chen, Xiaoshi
Chen, Jiayun
Lin, Shudai
Li, Xingsong
Du, Hongli
Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title_full Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title_fullStr Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title_full_unstemmed Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title_short Systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
title_sort systematic comparison of somatic variant calling performance among different sequencing depth and mutation frequency
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7044309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32103116
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60559-5
work_keys_str_mv AT chenzixi systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT yuanyuchen systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT chenxiaoshi systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT chenjiayun systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT linshudai systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT lixingsong systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency
AT duhongli systematiccomparisonofsomaticvariantcallingperformanceamongdifferentsequencingdepthandmutationfrequency