SiNVICT: ultra-sensitive detection of single nucleotide variants and indels in circulating tumour DNA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
MOTIVATION: Successful development and application of precision oncology approaches require robust elucidation of the genomic landscape of a patient's cancer and, ideally, the ability to monitor therapy-induced genomic changes in the tumour in an inexpensive and minimally invasive manner. Thanks to recent advances in sequencing technologies, 'liquid biopsy', the sampling of patient's bodily fluids such as blood and urine, is considered as one of the most promising approaches to achieve this goal. In many cancer patients, and especially those with advanced metastatic disease, deep sequencing of circulating cell free DNA (cfDNA) obtained from patient's blood yields a mixture of reads originating from the normal DNA and from multiple tumour subclones-called circulating tumour DNA or ctDNA. The ctDNA/cfDNA ratio as well as the proportion of ctDNA originating from specific tumour subclones depend on multiple factors, making comprehensive detection of mutations difficult, especially at early stages of cancer. Furthermore, sensitive and accurate detection of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and indels from cfDNA is constrained by several factors such as the sequencing errors and PCR artifacts, and mapping errors related to repeat regions within the genome. In this article, we introduce SiNVICT, a computational method that increases the sensitivity and specificity of SNV and indel detection at very low variant allele frequencies. SiNVICT has the capability to handle multiple sequencing platforms with different error properties; it minimizes false positives resulting from mapping errors and other technology specific artifacts including strand bias and low base quality at read ends. SiNVICT also has the capability to perform time-series analysis, where samples from a patient sequenced at multiple time points are jointly examined to report locations of interest where there is a possibility that certain clones were wiped out by some treatment while some subclones gained selective advantage. RESULTS: We tested SiNVICT on simulated data as well as prostate cancer cell lines and cfDNA obtained from castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. On both simulated and biological data, SiNVICT was able to detect SNVs and indels with variant allele percentages as low as 0.5%. The lowest amounts of total DNA used for the biological data where SNVs and indels could be detected with very high sensitivity were 2.5 ng on the Ion Torrent platform and 10 ng on Illumina. With increased sequencing and mapping accuracy, SiNVICT might be utilized in clinical settings, making it possible to track the progress of point mutations and indels that are associated with resistance to cancer therapies and provide patients personalized treatment. We also compared SiNVICT with other popular SNV callers such as MuTect, VarScan2 and Freebayes. Our results show that SiNVICT performs better than these tools in most cases and allows further data exploration such as time-series analysis on cfDNA sequencing data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: SiNVICT is available at: https://sfu-compbio.github.io/sinvictSupplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. CONTACT: cenk@sfu.ca.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».