Question: Pindel lower the mutation rate in indel calling
0
gravatar for jinxinhao1988
5 months ago by
China/Beijing
jinxinhao198860 wrote:

Dear all,

I have a question with calling indels with Pindel. First I use BWA mem in mapping the reads with hg19 reference with default parameter. Then I use pindel to call indels, since I have the standard answers of my data. The mutation rate of indels are all below the answers. I use 1% and 500X depth as a cut-off value. Therefore I missed some high confidence somatic indels (should be above 1% in mutation rate).

For now, we think that it may be the parameter we set in BWA mapping. Maybe we should change the mismatch settings to a lower one to allow more mismatch. Does anyone have encountered this situation and could give us some suggestions? It would be highly appreciated. Thank you for your time.

pindel snp • 164 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 4 months ago by Kevin Blighe33k • written 5 months ago by jinxinhao198860
0
gravatar for Kevin Blighe
4 months ago by
Kevin Blighe33k
Republic of Ireland
Kevin Blighe33k wrote:

I think that you will have better luck by configuring the settings of pindel. For example, after you run pindel, convert the output to VCF and configure parameters like --min_coverage, --het_cutoff, and --hom_cutoff:

pindel2vcf --pindel_output_root pindelOutput/ -r hg19.fasta -R GRCh37 -d 12121990 --min_coverage 1 --het_cutoff 0.1 --hom_cutoff 0.9 --vcf out.vcf

Also look at the -E/--sensitivity parameter that is passed to the pindel command itself. Look at all other options, too.

Kevin

ADD COMMENTlink modified 4 months ago • written 4 months ago by Kevin Blighe33k

Thank you Kevin for your reply. The main problem is that the pindel wrongly estimated the VAF of indels, so I think that the filteration may not help much. I have tried to adjust the -E parameter, It didn't change much. I have contacted with the author of the software, and he replied that the pindel may cause this problem because of its stringent calculation of ALT reads. I have turned to use Mutect2 to call somatic mutation, and I'm satisfied with the results. But still the GATK running time is SO SO long.

ADD REPLYlink written 4 months ago by jinxinhao198860

Yes, great that you contacted the author. Also, yes, GATK can be very slow! GATK4 should have CPU parallel processing capability, though.

ADD REPLYlink modified 4 months ago • written 4 months ago by Kevin Blighe33k
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: 1160 users visited in the last hour