Question: Which Somatic SNP Callers to Benchmark?
1
gravatar for sichan
3.7 years ago by
sichan70
Canada
sichan70 wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I want to benchmark somatic variant callers.  The callers should:

  • handle tumor/normal genomes, but it would be nice if the caller could handle exomes, targeted resequencing, etc
  • be well supported and maintained (e.g. questions/answers regarding software being posted in online forums, bug fixes and new releases being released, etc)
  • published in peer-reviewed journal (or at least in submission)
  • output final results in VCF

Note that somatic SNPs is the main priority at the moment.

This older BioStars post has provided a very nice summary of tools available ~2 years ago:
A: Best Software For Detection Of Somatic Mutations From Matched Tumor:Normal Ngs D

Given my list of requirements, I've come up with these 14 tools:
GATK
Isaac
LoFreq
MutationSeq
MuTect
Samtools
Shimmer
SomaticSniper
Strelka
VarScan2
FreeBayes
SNVer
Platypus
HapMuC

Are there any others you would recommend?

Thanks.

snp next-gen assembly • 1.5k views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 3.7 years ago by Len Trigg1.2k • written 3.7 years ago by sichan70
0
gravatar for Chris Miller
3.7 years ago by
Chris Miller20k
Washington University in St. Louis, MO
Chris Miller20k wrote:
I have no callers to add, but will mention that in general, you'll see better performance by intersecting several different callers, as opposed to lookong at each caller individually. See the bottom panel on our poster here for some results from ultra deep sequencing: http://figshare.com/articles/Ultra_deep_whole_genome_sequencing_reveals_clinically_relevant_low_frequency_subclones_in_an_acute_myeloid_leukemia/1304601 Full results are in a manuscript that's in submission, but the bottom line is that they all produce poor results on variants below about 20% VAF.
ADD COMMENTlink written 3.7 years ago by Chris Miller20k

Hi Chris, Just an observation from the poster. In the main figure for scatter plot of AML31 it says, "At relapse, the subclone represented by cluster 4 was the dominant clone,  though it comprised only about 1% of the cells in the original tumor".  Did you mean the cluster-3 in relapse with IDH2 mutation ? Might have been a typo there.

ADD REPLYlink written 3.7 years ago by poisonAlien2.6k

Yeah, that was a typo - nice catch :)

ADD REPLYlink written 3.7 years ago by Chris Miller20k

Did it get published?Thanks.

ADD REPLYlink written 2.4 years ago by hongen.hugo.xu0

Yes: http://www.cell.com/cell-systems/abstract/S2405-4712(15)00113-1

ADD REPLYlink written 2.4 years ago by Chris Miller20k
0
gravatar for Len Trigg
3.7 years ago by
Len Trigg1.2k
New Zealand
Len Trigg1.2k wrote:

Some of the ones in your list are just general variant callers, which I assume you will be manually comparing calls between the tumor/normal samples to pull out candidate somatic variants.

You might also like to try Real Time Genomics somatic caller which does joint Bayesian somatic variant detection, you can adjust the somatic prior and specify an estimate of tumor cellularity if known.

 

ADD COMMENTlink written 3.7 years ago by Len Trigg1.2k
Please log in to add an answer.

Help
Access

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 1049 users visited in the last hour