MOTIVATION: Structural variants, including duplications, insertions, deletions and inversions of large blocks of DNA sequence, are an important contributor to human genome variation. Measuring structural variants in a genome sequence is typically more challenging than measuring single nucleotide changes. Current approaches for structural variant identification, including paired-end DNA sequencing/mapping and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), do not identify the boundaries of variants precisely. Consequently, most reported human structural variants are poorly defined and not readily compared across different studies and measurement techniques. RESULTS: We introduce Geometric Analysis of Structural Variants (GASV), a geometric approach for identification, classification and comparison of structural variants. This approach represents the uncertainty in measurement of a structural variant as a polygon in the plane, and identifies measurements supporting the same variant by computing intersections of polygons. We derive a computational geometry algorithm to efficiently identify all such intersections. We apply GASV to sequencing data from nine individual human genomes and several cancer genomes. We obtain better localization of the boundaries of structural variants, distinguish genetic from putative somatic structural variants in cancer genomes, and integrate aCGH and paired-end sequencing measurements of structural variants. This work presents the first general framework for comparing structural variants across multiple samples and measurement techniques, and will be useful for studies of both genetic structural variants and somatic rearrangements in cancer. AVAILABILITY: http://cs.brown.edu/people/braphael/software.html .
MOTIVATION: Structural variants, including duplications, insertions, deletions and inversions of large blocks of DNA sequence, are an important contributor to human genome variation. Measuring structural variants in a genome sequence is typically more challenging than measuring single nucleotide changes. Current approaches for structural variant identification, including paired-end DNA sequencing/mapping and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), do not identify the boundaries of variants precisely. Consequently, most reported human structural variants are poorly defined and not readily compared across different studies and measurement techniques. RESULTS: We introduce Geometric Analysis of Structural Variants (GASV), a geometric approach for identification, classification and comparison of structural variants. This approach represents the uncertainty in measurement of a structural variant as a polygon in the plane, and identifies measurements supporting the same variant by computing intersections of polygons. We derive a computational geometry algorithm to efficiently identify all such intersections. We apply GASV to sequencing data from nine individual human genomes and several cancer genomes. We obtain better localization of the boundaries of structural variants, distinguish genetic from putative somatic structural variants in cancer genomes, and integrate aCGH and paired-end sequencing measurements of structural variants. This work presents the first general framework for comparing structural variants across multiple samples and measurement techniques, and will be useful for studies of both genetic structural variants and somatic rearrangements in cancer. AVAILABILITY: http://cs.brown.edu/people/braphael/software.html .
Authors: George H Perry; Amir Ben-Dor; Anya Tsalenko; Nick Sampas; Laia Rodriguez-Revenga; Charles W Tran; Alicia Scheffer; Israel Steinfeld; Peter Tsang; N Alice Yamada; Han Soo Park; Jong-Il Kim; Jeong-Sun Seo; Zohar Yakhini; Stephen Laderman; Laurakay Bruhn; Charles Lee Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2008-01-24 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Christian R Marshall; Abdul Noor; John B Vincent; Anath C Lionel; Lars Feuk; Jennifer Skaug; Mary Shago; Rainald Moessner; Dalila Pinto; Yan Ren; Bhooma Thiruvahindrapduram; Andreas Fiebig; Stefan Schreiber; Jan Friedman; Cees E J Ketelaars; Yvonne J Vos; Can Ficicioglu; Susan Kirkpatrick; Rob Nicolson; Leon Sloman; Anne Summers; Clare A Gibbons; Ahmad Teebi; David Chitayat; Rosanna Weksberg; Ann Thompson; Cathy Vardy; Vicki Crosbie; Sandra Luscombe; Rebecca Baatjes; Lonnie Zwaigenbaum; Wendy Roberts; Bridget Fernandez; Peter Szatmari; Stephen W Scherer Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: David A Wheeler; Maithreyan Srinivasan; Michael Egholm; Yufeng Shen; Lei Chen; Amy McGuire; Wen He; Yi-Ju Chen; Vinod Makhijani; G Thomas Roth; Xavier Gomes; Karrie Tartaro; Faheem Niazi; Cynthia L Turcotte; Gerard P Irzyk; James R Lupski; Craig Chinault; Xing-zhi Song; Yue Liu; Ye Yuan; Lynne Nazareth; Xiang Qin; Donna M Muzny; Marcel Margulies; George M Weinstock; Richard A Gibbs; Jonathan M Rothberg Journal: Nature Date: 2008-04-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Peter J Campbell; Philip J Stephens; Erin D Pleasance; Sarah O'Meara; Heng Li; Thomas Santarius; Lucy A Stebbings; Catherine Leroy; Sarah Edkins; Claire Hardy; Jon W Teague; Andrew Menzies; Ian Goodhead; Daniel J Turner; Christopher M Clee; Michael A Quail; Antony Cox; Clive Brown; Richard Durbin; Matthew E Hurles; Paul A W Edwards; Graham R Bignell; Michael R Stratton; P Andrew Futreal Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2008-04-27 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Jan O Korbel; Alexander Eckehart Urban; Jason P Affourtit; Brian Godwin; Fabian Grubert; Jan Fredrik Simons; Philip M Kim; Dean Palejev; Nicholas J Carriero; Lei Du; Bruce E Taillon; Zhoutao Chen; Andrea Tanzer; A C Eugenia Saunders; Jianxiang Chi; Fengtang Yang; Nigel P Carter; Matthew E Hurles; Sherman M Weissman; Timothy T Harkins; Mark B Gerstein; Michael Egholm; Michael Snyder Journal: Science Date: 2007-09-27 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Jeffrey M Kidd; Gregory M Cooper; William F Donahue; Hillary S Hayden; Nick Sampas; Tina Graves; Nancy Hansen; Brian Teague; Can Alkan; Francesca Antonacci; Eric Haugen; Troy Zerr; N Alice Yamada; Peter Tsang; Tera L Newman; Eray Tüzün; Ze Cheng; Heather M Ebling; Nadeem Tusneem; Robert David; Will Gillett; Karen A Phelps; Molly Weaver; David Saranga; Adrianne Brand; Wei Tao; Erik Gustafson; Kevin McKernan; Lin Chen; Maika Malig; Joshua D Smith; Joshua M Korn; Steven A McCarroll; David A Altshuler; Daniel A Peiffer; Michael Dorschner; John Stamatoyannopoulos; David Schwartz; Deborah A Nickerson; James C Mullikin; Richard K Wilson; Laurakay Bruhn; Maynard V Olson; Rajinder Kaul; Douglas R Smith; Evan E Eichler Journal: Nature Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Benjamin J Raphael; Stanislav Volik; Peng Yu; Chunxiao Wu; Guiqing Huang; Elena V Linardopoulou; Barbara J Trask; Frederic Waldman; Joseph Costello; Kenneth J Pienta; Gordon B Mills; Krystyna Bajsarowicz; Yasuko Kobayashi; Shivaranjani Sridharan; Pamela L Paris; Quanzhou Tao; Sarah J Aerni; Raymond P Brown; Ali Bashir; Joe W Gray; Jan-Fang Cheng; Pieter de Jong; Mikhail Nefedov; Thomas Ried; Hesed M Padilla-Nash; Colin C Collins Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2008-03-25 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Fereydoun Hormozdiari; Iman Hajirasouliha; Andrew McPherson; Evan E Eichler; S Cenk Sahinalp Journal: Genome Res Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Ruibin Xi; Angela G Hadjipanayis; Lovelace J Luquette; Tae-Min Kim; Eunjung Lee; Jianhua Zhang; Mark D Johnson; Donna M Muzny; David A Wheeler; Richard A Gibbs; Raju Kucherlapati; Peter J Park Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Aaron R Quinlan; Royden A Clark; Svetlana Sokolova; Mitchell L Leibowitz; Yujun Zhang; Matthew E Hurles; Joshua C Mell; Ira M Hall Journal: Genome Res Date: 2010-03-22 Impact factor: 9.043