Closing the gaps, and improving somatic structural variant analysis and benchmarking using CHM13-T2T
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexities of cancer genomes are becoming more easily interpreted due to advancements in sequencing technologies and improved bioinformatic analysis. Structural variants (SVs) represent an important subset of somatic events in tumors. While the detection of SVs has been markedly improved by the development of long-read sequencing, somatic variant identification and annotation remain challenging. We hypothesized that the use of a completed human reference genome (CHM13-T2T) would improve somatic SV calling. Our findings in a tumor-normal matched benchmark sample and three patient samples show that the CHM13-T2T improves SV detection accuracy compared to GRCh38 with a notable reduction in false-positive calls, and thus supports improved prioritization. We also overcame the lack of annotation resources for CHM13-T2T by lifting over CHM13-T2T-aligned reads to the GRCh38 genome, therefore combining both improved alignment and advanced annotations. In this process, we assessed the current SV benchmark set for COLO829/COLO829BL across four replicates sequenced at different centers with different long-read technologies. We discovered instability of this cell line across these replicates; 346 SVs (1.13%) were only discoverable in a single replicate. We identify 54 somatic SVs, which appear to be stable as they are consistently present across the four replicates. As such, we propose this consensus set as an updated benchmark for somatic SV calling and include both GRCh38 and CHM13-T2T coordinates in our benchmark. Our work demonstrates new approaches to optimize somatic SV detection in cancer with potential improvements in other genetic diseases.
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 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".