Literature DB >> 26946255

CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.

Harish Swaminathan1, Abhishek Garg2, Catherine M Grgicak3, Muriel Medard4, Desmond S Lun5.   

Abstract

In forensic DNA interpretation, the likelihood ratio (LR) is often used to convey the strength of a match. Expanding on binary and semi-continuous methods that do not use all of the quantitative data contained in an electropherogram, fully continuous methods to calculate the LR have been created. These fully continuous methods utilize all of the information captured in the electropherogram, including the peak heights. Recently, methods that calculate the distribution of the LR using semi-continuous methods have also been developed. The LR distribution has been proposed as a way of studying the robustness of the LR, which varies depending on the probabilistic model used for its calculation. For example, the LR distribution can be used to calculate the p-value, which is the probability that a randomly chosen individual results in a LR greater than the LR obtained from the person-of-interest (POI). Hence, the p-value is a statistic that is different from, but related to, the LR; and it may be interpreted as the false positive rate resulting from a binary hypothesis test between the prosecution and defense hypotheses. Here, we present CEESIt, a method that combines the twin features of a fully continuous model to calculate the LR and its distribution, conditioned on the defense hypothesis, along with an associated p-value. CEESIt incorporates dropout, noise and stutter (reverse and forward) in its calculation. As calibration data, CEESIt uses single source samples with known genotypes and calculates a LR for a specified POI on a question sample, along with the LR distribution and a p-value. The method was tested on 303 files representing 1-, 2- and 3-person samples injected using three injection times containing between 0.016 and 1 ng of template DNA. Our data allows us to evaluate changes in the LR and p-value with respect to the complexity of the sample and to facilitate discussions regarding complex DNA mixture interpretation. We observed that the amount of template DNA from the contributor impacted the LR--small LRs resulted from contributors with low template masses. Moreover, as expected, we observed a decrease of p-values as the LR increased. A p-value of 10(-9) or lower was achieved in all the cases where the LR was greater than 10(8). We tested the repeatability of CEESIt by running all samples in duplicate and found the results to be repeatable.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA analysis; LR distribution; Likelihood ratio; Mixture interpretation; p-Value

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26946255     DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet        ISSN: 1872-4973            Impact factor:   4.882


  5 in total

1.  Towards developing forensically relevant single-cell pipelines by incorporating direct-to-PCR extraction: compatibility, signal quality, and allele detection.

Authors:  Nidhi Sheth; Harish Swaminathan; Amanda J Gonzalez; Ken R Duffy; Catherine M Grgicak
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Estimating individual mtDNA haplotypes in mixed DNA samples by combining MinION and MiSeq.

Authors:  Hiroaki Nakanishi; Katsumi Yoneyama; Masaaki Hara; Aya Takada; Kentaro Sakai; Kazuyuki Saito
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 2.686

3.  Four model variants within a continuous forensic DNA mixture interpretation framework: Effects on evidential inference and reporting.

Authors:  Harish Swaminathan; Muhammad O Qureshi; Catherine M Grgicak; Ken Duffy; Desmond S Lun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Development and validation of open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation based on a quantitative continuous model.

Authors:  Sho Manabe; Chie Morimoto; Yuya Hamano; Shuntaro Fujimoto; Keiji Tamaki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Interpol review of forensic biology and forensic DNA typing 2016-2019.

Authors:  John M Butler; Sheila Willis
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 2.395

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.