CLImAT: accurate detection of copy number alteration and loss of heterozygosity in impure and aneuploid tumor samples using whole-genome sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Whole-genome sequencing of tumor samples has been demonstrated as an efficient approach for comprehensive analysis of genomic aberrations in cancer genome. Critical issues such as tumor impurity and aneuploidy, GC-content and mappability bias have been reported to complicate identification of copy number alteration and loss of heterozygosity in complex tumor samples. Therefore, efficient computational methods are required to address these issues. RESULTS: We introduce CLImAT (CNA and LOH Assessment in Impure and Aneuploid Tumors), a bioinformatics tool for identification of genomic aberrations from tumor samples using whole-genome sequencing data. Without requiring a matched normal sample, CLImAT takes integrated analysis of read depth and allelic frequency and provides extensive data processing procedures including GC-content and mappability correction of read depth and quantile normalization of B-allele frequency. CLImAT accurately identifies copy number alteration and loss of heterozygosity even for highly impure tumor samples with aneuploidy. We evaluate CLImAT on both simulated and real DNA sequencing data to demonstrate its ability to infer tumor impurity and ploidy and identify genomic aberrations in complex tumor samples. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The CLImAT software package can be freely downloaded at http://bioinformatics.ustc.edu.cn/CLImAT/.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".