Cargando…

Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples

BACKGROUND: Research grade Fresh Frozen (FF) DNA material is not yet routinely collected in clinical practice. Many hospitals, however, collect and store Formalin Fixed Paraffin Embedded (FFPE) tumor samples. Consequently, the sample size of whole genome cancer cohort studies could be increased trem...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise, Larmuseau, Maarten, Van der Eecken, Kim, De Ryck, Frederic, Robbe, Pauline, Schuh, Anna, Fostier, Jan, Ost, Piet, Marchal, Kathleen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7336445/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-020-00746-5
_version_ 1783554321180262400
author de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise
Larmuseau, Maarten
Van der Eecken, Kim
De Ryck, Frederic
Robbe, Pauline
Schuh, Anna
Fostier, Jan
Ost, Piet
Marchal, Kathleen
author_facet de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise
Larmuseau, Maarten
Van der Eecken, Kim
De Ryck, Frederic
Robbe, Pauline
Schuh, Anna
Fostier, Jan
Ost, Piet
Marchal, Kathleen
author_sort de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Research grade Fresh Frozen (FF) DNA material is not yet routinely collected in clinical practice. Many hospitals, however, collect and store Formalin Fixed Paraffin Embedded (FFPE) tumor samples. Consequently, the sample size of whole genome cancer cohort studies could be increased tremendously by including FFPE samples, although the presence of artefacts might obfuscate the variant calling. To assess whether FFPE material can be used for cohort studies, we performed an in-depth comparison of somatic SNVs called on matching FF and FFPE Whole Genome Sequence (WGS) samples extracted from the same tumor. METHODS: Four variant callers (i.e. Strelka2, Mutect2, VarScan2 and Shimmer) were used to call somatic variants on matching FF and FFPE WGS samples from a metastatic prostate tumor. Using the variants identified by these callers, we developed a heuristic to maximize the overlap between the FF and its FFPE counterpart in terms of sensitivity and precision. The proposed variant calling approach was then validated on nine matched primary samples. Finally, we assessed what fraction of the discrepancy could be attributed to intra-tumor heterogeneity (ITH), by comparing the overlap in clonal and subclonal somatic variants. RESULTS: We first compared variants between an FF and an FFPE sample from a metastatic prostate tumor, showing that on average 50% of the calls in the FF are recovered in the FFPE sample, with notable differences between callers. Combining the variants of the different callers using a simple heuristic, increases both the precision and the sensitivity of the variant calling. Validating the heuristic on nine additional matched FF-FFPE samples, resulted in an average F1-score of 0.58 and an outperformance of any of the individual callers. In addition, we could show that part of the discrepancy between the FF and the FFPE samples can be attributed to ITH. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates that when using the correct variant calling strategy, the majority of clonal SNVs can be recovered in an FFPE sample with high precision and sensitivity. These results suggest that somatic variants derived from WGS of FFPE material can be used in cohort studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7336445
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73364452020-07-08 Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise Larmuseau, Maarten Van der Eecken, Kim De Ryck, Frederic Robbe, Pauline Schuh, Anna Fostier, Jan Ost, Piet Marchal, Kathleen BMC Med Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: Research grade Fresh Frozen (FF) DNA material is not yet routinely collected in clinical practice. Many hospitals, however, collect and store Formalin Fixed Paraffin Embedded (FFPE) tumor samples. Consequently, the sample size of whole genome cancer cohort studies could be increased tremendously by including FFPE samples, although the presence of artefacts might obfuscate the variant calling. To assess whether FFPE material can be used for cohort studies, we performed an in-depth comparison of somatic SNVs called on matching FF and FFPE Whole Genome Sequence (WGS) samples extracted from the same tumor. METHODS: Four variant callers (i.e. Strelka2, Mutect2, VarScan2 and Shimmer) were used to call somatic variants on matching FF and FFPE WGS samples from a metastatic prostate tumor. Using the variants identified by these callers, we developed a heuristic to maximize the overlap between the FF and its FFPE counterpart in terms of sensitivity and precision. The proposed variant calling approach was then validated on nine matched primary samples. Finally, we assessed what fraction of the discrepancy could be attributed to intra-tumor heterogeneity (ITH), by comparing the overlap in clonal and subclonal somatic variants. RESULTS: We first compared variants between an FF and an FFPE sample from a metastatic prostate tumor, showing that on average 50% of the calls in the FF are recovered in the FFPE sample, with notable differences between callers. Combining the variants of the different callers using a simple heuristic, increases both the precision and the sensitivity of the variant calling. Validating the heuristic on nine additional matched FF-FFPE samples, resulted in an average F1-score of 0.58 and an outperformance of any of the individual callers. In addition, we could show that part of the discrepancy between the FF and the FFPE samples can be attributed to ITH. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates that when using the correct variant calling strategy, the majority of clonal SNVs can be recovered in an FFPE sample with high precision and sensitivity. These results suggest that somatic variants derived from WGS of FFPE material can be used in cohort studies. BioMed Central 2020-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7336445/ /pubmed/32631411 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-020-00746-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis 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/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
de Schaetzen van Brienen, Louise
Larmuseau, Maarten
Van der Eecken, Kim
De Ryck, Frederic
Robbe, Pauline
Schuh, Anna
Fostier, Jan
Ost, Piet
Marchal, Kathleen
Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title_full Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title_short Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples
title_sort comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched ff and ffpe wgs samples
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7336445/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-020-00746-5
work_keys_str_mv AT deschaetzenvanbrienenlouise comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT larmuseaumaarten comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT vandereeckenkim comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT deryckfrederic comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT robbepauline comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT schuhanna comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT fostierjan comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT ostpiet comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples
AT marchalkathleen comparativeanalysisofsomaticvariantcallingonmatchedffandffpewgssamples