Cargando…
A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping
Genetic variation in genes encoding cytochrome P450 enzymes has important clinical implications for drug metabolism. Bioinformatics algorithms for genotyping these highly polymorphic genes using high-throughput sequence data and automating phenotype prediction have recently been developed. The CYP2D...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398905/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32789024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41525-020-0135-2 |
_version_ | 1783566038772744192 |
---|---|
author | Twesigomwe, David Wright, Galen E. B. Drögemöller, Britt I. da Rocha, Jorge Lombard, Zané Hazelhurst, Scott |
author_facet | Twesigomwe, David Wright, Galen E. B. Drögemöller, Britt I. da Rocha, Jorge Lombard, Zané Hazelhurst, Scott |
author_sort | Twesigomwe, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | Genetic variation in genes encoding cytochrome P450 enzymes has important clinical implications for drug metabolism. Bioinformatics algorithms for genotyping these highly polymorphic genes using high-throughput sequence data and automating phenotype prediction have recently been developed. The CYP2D6 gene is often used as a model during the validation of these algorithms due to its clinical importance, high polymorphism, and structural variations. However, the validation process is often limited to common star alleles due to scarcity of reference datasets. In addition, there has been no comprehensive benchmark of these algorithms to date. We performed a systematic comparison of three star allele calling algorithms using 4618 simulations as well as 75 whole-genome sequence samples from the GeT-RM project. Overall, we found that Aldy and Astrolabe are better suited to call both common and rare diplotypes compared to Stargazer, which is affected by population structure. Aldy was the best performing algorithm in calling CYP2D6 structural variants followed by Stargazer, whereas Astrolabe had limitations especially in calling hybrid rearrangements. We found that ensemble genotyping, characterised by taking a consensus of genotypes called by all three algorithms, has higher haplotype concordance but it is prone to ambiguities whenever complete discrepancies between the tools arise. Further, we evaluated the effects of sequencing coverage and indel misalignment on genotyping accuracy. Our account of the strengths and limitations of these algorithms is extremely important to clinicians and researchers in the pharmacogenomics and precision medicine communities looking to haplotype CYP2D6 and other pharmacogenes using high-throughput sequencing data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7398905 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73989052020-08-11 A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping Twesigomwe, David Wright, Galen E. B. Drögemöller, Britt I. da Rocha, Jorge Lombard, Zané Hazelhurst, Scott NPJ Genom Med Article Genetic variation in genes encoding cytochrome P450 enzymes has important clinical implications for drug metabolism. Bioinformatics algorithms for genotyping these highly polymorphic genes using high-throughput sequence data and automating phenotype prediction have recently been developed. The CYP2D6 gene is often used as a model during the validation of these algorithms due to its clinical importance, high polymorphism, and structural variations. However, the validation process is often limited to common star alleles due to scarcity of reference datasets. In addition, there has been no comprehensive benchmark of these algorithms to date. We performed a systematic comparison of three star allele calling algorithms using 4618 simulations as well as 75 whole-genome sequence samples from the GeT-RM project. Overall, we found that Aldy and Astrolabe are better suited to call both common and rare diplotypes compared to Stargazer, which is affected by population structure. Aldy was the best performing algorithm in calling CYP2D6 structural variants followed by Stargazer, whereas Astrolabe had limitations especially in calling hybrid rearrangements. We found that ensemble genotyping, characterised by taking a consensus of genotypes called by all three algorithms, has higher haplotype concordance but it is prone to ambiguities whenever complete discrepancies between the tools arise. Further, we evaluated the effects of sequencing coverage and indel misalignment on genotyping accuracy. Our account of the strengths and limitations of these algorithms is extremely important to clinicians and researchers in the pharmacogenomics and precision medicine communities looking to haplotype CYP2D6 and other pharmacogenes using high-throughput sequencing data. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7398905/ /pubmed/32789024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41525-020-0135-2 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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Twesigomwe, David Wright, Galen E. B. Drögemöller, Britt I. da Rocha, Jorge Lombard, Zané Hazelhurst, Scott A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title | A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title_full | A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title_fullStr | A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title_short | A systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on CYP2D6 genotyping |
title_sort | systematic comparison of pharmacogene star allele calling bioinformatics algorithms: a focus on cyp2d6 genotyping |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398905/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32789024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41525-020-0135-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT twesigomwedavid asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT wrightgaleneb asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT drogemollerbritti asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT darochajorge asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT lombardzane asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT hazelhurstscott asystematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT twesigomwedavid systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT wrightgaleneb systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT drogemollerbritti systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT darochajorge systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT lombardzane systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping AT hazelhurstscott systematiccomparisonofpharmacogenestarallelecallingbioinformaticsalgorithmsafocusoncyp2d6genotyping |