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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |