Literature DB >> 32958763

Retrospective evaluation of whole exome and genome mutation calls in 746 cancer samples.

Matthew H Bailey1,2,3, William U Meyerson4,5, Lewis Jonathan Dursi6,7, Liang-Bo Wang1,2, Guanlan Dong2, Wen-Wei Liang1,2, Amila Weerasinghe1,2, Shantao Li5, Yize Li1, Sean Kelso2, Gordon Saksena8, Kyle Ellrott9, Michael C Wendl1,10,11, David A Wheeler12,13, Gad Getz8,14,15,16, Jared T Simpson6,17, Mark B Gerstein18,19,20, Li Ding21,22,23,24.   

Abstract

The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) curated consensus somatic mutation calls using whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS), respectively. Here, as part of the ICGC/TCGA Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium, which aggregated whole genome sequencing data from 2,658 cancers across 38 tumour types, we compare WES and WGS side-by-side from 746 TCGA samples, finding that ~80% of mutations overlap in covered exonic regions. We estimate that low variant allele fraction (VAF < 15%) and clonal heterogeneity contribute up to 68% of private WGS mutations and 71% of private WES mutations. We observe that ~30% of private WGS mutations trace to mutations identified by a single variant caller in WES consensus efforts. WGS captures both ~50% more variation in exonic regions and un-observed mutations in loci with variable GC-content. Together, our analysis highlights technological divergences between two reproducible somatic variant detection efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32958763      PMCID: PMC7505971          DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-18151-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Commun        ISSN: 2041-1723            Impact factor:   14.919


  32 in total

1.  VarScan 2: somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing.

Authors:  Daniel C Koboldt; Qunyuan Zhang; David E Larson; Dong Shen; Michael D McLellan; Ling Lin; Christopher A Miller; Elaine R Mardis; Li Ding; Richard K Wilson
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 9.043

2.  Whole-genome sequencing is more powerful than whole-exome sequencing for detecting exome variants.

Authors:  Aziz Belkadi; Alexandre Bolze; Yuval Itan; Aurélie Cobat; Quentin B Vincent; Alexander Antipenko; Lei Shang; Bertrand Boisson; Jean-Laurent Casanova; Laurent Abel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Larvivorous potential of some cypriniformes fishes.

Authors:  K N Panicker; R Srinivasan; K Viswam; P K Rajagopalan
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  SomaticSniper: identification of somatic point mutations in whole genome sequencing data.

Authors:  David E Larson; Christopher C Harris; Ken Chen; Daniel C Koboldt; Travis E Abbott; David J Dooling; Timothy J Ley; Elaine R Mardis; Richard K Wilson; Li Ding
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Pindel: a pattern growth approach to detect break points of large deletions and medium sized insertions from paired-end short reads.

Authors:  Kai Ye; Marcel H Schulz; Quan Long; Rolf Apweiler; Zemin Ning
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-06-26       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 6.  Sequencing depth and coverage: key considerations in genomic analyses.

Authors:  David Sims; Ian Sudbery; Nicholas E Ilott; Andreas Heger; Chris P Ponting
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 53.242

7.  Comprehensive characterization of complex structural variations in cancer by directly comparing genome sequence reads.

Authors:  Valentí Moncunill; Santi Gonzalez; Sílvia Beà; Lise O Andrieux; Itziar Salaverria; Cristina Royo; Laura Martinez; Montserrat Puiggròs; Maia Segura-Wang; Adrian M Stütz; Alba Navarro; Romina Royo; Josep L Gelpí; Ivo G Gut; Carlos López-Otín; Modesto Orozco; Jan O Korbel; Elias Campo; Xose S Puente; David Torrents
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2014-10-26       Impact factor: 54.908

8.  Initial genome sequencing and analysis of multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Michael A Chapman; Michael S Lawrence; Jonathan J Keats; Kristian Cibulskis; Carrie Sougnez; Anna C Schinzel; Christina L Harview; Jean-Philippe Brunet; Gregory J Ahmann; Mazhar Adli; Kenneth C Anderson; Kristin G Ardlie; Daniel Auclair; Angela Baker; P Leif Bergsagel; Bradley E Bernstein; Yotam Drier; Rafael Fonseca; Stacey B Gabriel; Craig C Hofmeister; Sundar Jagannath; Andrzej J Jakubowiak; Amrita Krishnan; Joan Levy; Ted Liefeld; Sagar Lonial; Scott Mahan; Bunmi Mfuko; Stefano Monti; Louise M Perkins; Robb Onofrio; Trevor J Pugh; S Vincent Rajkumar; Alex H Ramos; David S Siegel; Andrey Sivachenko; A Keith Stewart; Suzanne Trudel; Ravi Vij; Douglas Voet; Wendy Winckler; Todd Zimmerman; John Carpten; Jeff Trent; William C Hahn; Levi A Garraway; Matthew Meyerson; Eric S Lander; Gad Getz; Todd R Golub
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  MuSE: accounting for tumor heterogeneity using a sample-specific error model improves sensitivity and specificity in mutation calling from sequencing data.

Authors:  Yu Fan; Liu Xi; Daniel S T Hughes; Jianjun Zhang; Jianhua Zhang; P Andrew Futreal; David A Wheeler; Wenyi Wang
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 13.583

10.  Systematic discovery of complex insertions and deletions in human cancers.

Authors:  Kai Ye; Jiayin Wang; Reyka Jayasinghe; Eric-Wubbo Lameijer; Joshua F McMichael; Jie Ning; Michael D McLellan; Mingchao Xie; Song Cao; Venkata Yellapantula; Kuan-lin Huang; Adam Scott; Steven Foltz; Beifang Niu; Kimberly J Johnson; Matthijs Moed; P Eline Slagboom; Feng Chen; Michael C Wendl; Li Ding
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 53.440

View more
  9 in total

1.  Advances in Microfluidics for the Implementation of Liquid Biopsy in Clinical Routine.

Authors:  Alexandra Teixeira; Adriana Carneiro; Paulina Piairo; Miguel Xavier; Alar Ainla; Cláudia Lopes; Maria Sousa-Silva; Armando Dias; Ana S Martins; Carolina Rodrigues; Ricardo Pereira; Liliana R Pires; Sara Abalde-Cela; Lorena Diéguez
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 3.650

2.  Significance and limitations of the use of next-generation sequencing technologies for detecting mutational signatures.

Authors:  Ammal Abbasi; Ludmil B Alexandrov
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2021-08-05

3.  MutaXome: A Novel Database for Identified Somatic Variations of In silico Analyzed Cancer Exome Datasets.

Authors:  P Padmavathi; K Chandrashekar; Anagha S Setlur; Vidya Niranjan
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2022-05-13

4.  PanCancer analysis of somatic mutations in repetitive regions reveals recurrent mutations in snRNA U2.

Authors:  Pablo Bousquets-Muñoz; Ander Díaz-Navarro; Ferran Nadeu; Ana Sánchez-Pitiot; Sara López-Tamargo; Shimin Shuai; Milagros Balbín; Jose M C Tubio; Sílvia Beà; Jose I Martin-Subero; Ana Gutiérrez-Fernández; Lincoln D Stein; Elías Campo; Xose S Puente
Journal:  NPJ Genom Med       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 6.083

5.  Mutational Signature and Integrative Genomic Analysis of Human Papillomavirus-Associated Penile Squamous Cell Carcinomas from Latin American Patients.

Authors:  Luisa Matos Canto; Jenilson Mota da Silva; Patrícia Valèria Castelo-Branco; Ingrid Monteiro da Silva; Leudivan Nogueira; Carlos Eduardo Fonseca-Alves; André Khayat; Alexander Birbrair; Silma Regina Pereira
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-20       Impact factor: 6.575

6.  TMBur: a distributable tumor mutation burden approach for whole genome sequencing.

Authors:  Emma Titmuss; Richard D Corbett; Scott Davidson; Sanna Abbasi; Laura M Williamson; Erin D Pleasance; Adam Shlien; Daniel J Renouf; Steven J M Jones; Janessa Laskin; Marco A Marra
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 3.622

Review 7.  Big data in basic and translational cancer research.

Authors:  Peng Jiang; Sanju Sinha; Kenneth Aldape; Sridhar Hannenhalli; Cenk Sahinalp; Eytan Ruppin
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2022-09-05       Impact factor: 69.800

8.  Data Processing Thresholds for Abundance and Sparsity and Missed Biological Insights in an Untargeted Chemical Analysis of Blood Specimens for Exposomics.

Authors:  Dinesh Kumar Barupal; Sadjad Fakouri Baygi; Robert O Wright; Manish Arora
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-06-10

9.  JWES: a new pipeline for whole genome/exome sequence data processing, management, and gene-variant discovery, annotation, prediction, and genotyping.

Authors:  Zeeshan Ahmed; Eduard Gibert Renart; Deepshikha Mishra; Saman Zeeshan
Journal:  FEBS Open Bio       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 2.693

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.