Literature DB >> 26845461

Structural variation detection using next-generation sequencing data: A comparative technical review.

Peiyong Guan1, Wing-Kin Sung2.   

Abstract

Structural variations (SVs) are mutations in the genome of size at least fifty nucleotides. They contribute to the phenotypic differences among healthy individuals, cause severe diseases and even cancers by breaking or linking genes. Thus, it is crucial to systematically profile SVs in the genome. In the past decade, many next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based SV detection methods have been proposed due to the significant cost reduction of NGS experiments and their ability to unbiasedly detect SVs to the base-pair resolution. These SV detection methods vary in both sensitivity and specificity, since they use different SV-property-dependent and library-property-dependent features. As a result, predictions from different SV callers are often inconsistent. Besides, the noises in the data (both platform-specific sequencing error and artificial chimeric reads) impede the specificity of SV detection. Poorly characterized regions in the human genome (e.g., repeat regions) greatly impact the reads mapping and in turn affect the SV calling accuracy. Calling of complex SVs requires specialized SV callers. Apart from accuracy, processing speed of SV caller is another factor deciding its usability. Knowing the pros and cons of different SV calling techniques and the objectives of the biological study are essential for biologists and bioinformaticians to make informed decisions. This paper describes different components in the SV calling pipeline and reviews the techniques used by existing SV callers. Through simulation study, we also demonstrate that library properties, especially insert size, greatly impact the sensitivity of different SV callers. We hope the community can benefit from this work both in designing new SV calling methods and in selecting the appropriate SV caller for specific biological studies.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Next-generation sequencing; Structural variation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26845461     DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2016.01.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods        ISSN: 1046-2023            Impact factor:   3.608


  54 in total

Review 1.  Detecting Somatic Mutations in Normal Cells.

Authors:  Yanmei Dou; Heather D Gold; Lovelace J Luquette; Peter J Park
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 11.639

Review 2.  The Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Epilepsy in Paediatric Patients.

Authors:  Davide Mei; Elena Parrini; Carla Marini; Renzo Guerrini
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.074

3.  Characterization of intermediate-sized insertions using whole-genome sequencing data and analysis of their functional impact on gene expression.

Authors:  Saeideh Ashouri; Jing Hao Wong; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Mihoko Shimada; Katsushi Tokunaga; Akihiro Fujimoto
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 4.  From next-generation resequencing reads to a high-quality variant data set.

Authors:  S P Pfeifer
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 3.821

5.  TranSurVeyor: an improved database-free algorithm for finding non-reference transpositions in high-throughput sequencing data.

Authors:  Ramesh Rajaby; Wing-Kin Sung
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2018-11-16       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  A Comprehensive Workflow for Read Depth-Based Identification of Copy-Number Variation from Whole-Genome Sequence Data.

Authors:  Brett Trost; Susan Walker; Zhuozhi Wang; Bhooma Thiruvahindrapuram; Jeffrey R MacDonald; Wilson W L Sung; Sergio L Pereira; Joe Whitney; Ada J S Chan; Giovanna Pellecchia; Miriam S Reuter; Si Lok; Ryan K C Yuen; Christian R Marshall; Daniele Merico; Stephen W Scherer
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 11.025

7.  Large genomic insertion at the Shh locus results in hammer toes through enhancer adoption.

Authors:  Christina Paliou; Guillaume Andrey
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 8.  Long-read sequencing in deciphering human genetics to a greater depth.

Authors:  Mohit K Midha; Mengchu Wu; Kuo-Ping Chiu
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 9.  Structural variation in the sequencing era.

Authors:  Steve S Ho; Alexander E Urban; Ryan E Mills
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 53.242

10.  Analyzing Genome Rearrangements in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Anjana Srivatsan; Christopher D Putnam; Richard D Kolodner
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2018
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.