Question: VAF vs AD for germline samples
0
gravatar for jncoop
3.1 years ago by
jncoop0
jncoop0 wrote:

Hello everyone,

I am trying to get a better understanding of how the VAF might be related to sequencing depth and wanted to check with everyone here to make sure my analysis is correct. I have seen that some companies are willing to call somatic variants using only a somatic sample without a paired germline sample. My assumption is that they are calling variants and then filtering based upon COSMIC and 1000G or dbSNP to identify variants. I have also heard about people using a VAF of <40% to be evidence of a somatic mutation.

With this in mind I took a germline control sample and proceed it through muTect2 with only a pool of normals as a "control". I then plotted the VAF vs read depth for variants passing the mutect filters which I attached here. In this case it looks to me that until the AD is >100 it is possible to have significant variability in the VAF. This would call in to question any analysis of VAF that did not have at least 100x depth at a loci.

Does my thinking line up with what others have experienced? Is the deviation from 50% or 100% VAF for germline samples intrinsic to particular loci due to experimental issues such as the quality of the library capture or is this more of a sampling issue?

VAF vs AD

sequencing snp next-gen • 1.2k views
ADD COMMENTlink written 3.1 years ago by jncoop0
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: 998 users visited in the last hour