Dataset Information

Robust identification of deletions in exome and genome sequence data based on clustering of Mendelian errors.

ABSTRACT: Multiple tools have been developed to identify copy number variants (CNVs) from whole exome (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) data. Current tools such as XHMM for WES and CNVnator for WGS identify CNVs based on changes in read depth. For WGS, other methods to identify CNVs include utilizing discordant read pairs and split reads and genome-wide local assembly with tools such as Lumpy and SvABA, respectively. Here, we introduce a new method to identify deletion CNVs from WES and WGS trio data based on the clustering of Mendelian errors (MEs). Using our Mendelian Error Method (MEM), we identified 127 deletions (inherited and de novo) in 2,601 WES trios from the Pediatric Cardiac Genomics Consortium, with a validation rate of 88% by digital droplet PCR. MEM identified additional de novo deletions compared with XHMM, and a significant enrichment of 15q11.2 deletions compared with controls. In addition, MEM identified eight cases of uniparental disomy, sample switches, and DNA contamination. We applied MEM to WGS data from the Genome In A Bottle Ashkenazi trio and identified deletions with 97% specificity. MEM provides a robust, computationally inexpensive method for identifying deletions, and an orthogonal approach for verifying deletions called by other tools.

SUBMITTER: Manheimer KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6022753 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Robust identification of deletions in exome and genome sequence data based on clustering of Mendelian errors.

Manheimer Kathryn B KB Patel Nihir N Richter Felix F Gorham Joshua J Tai Angela C AC Homsy Jason J Boskovski Marko T MT Parfenov Michael M Goldmuntz Elizabeth E Chung Wendy K WK Brueckner Martina M Tristani-Firouzi Martin M Srivastava Deepak D Seidman Jonathan G JG Seidman Christine E CE Gelb Bruce D BD Sharp Andrew J AJ

Human mutation 20180322 6

Multiple tools have been developed to identify copy number variants (CNVs) from whole exome (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) data. Current tools such as XHMM for WES and CNVnator for WGS identify CNVs based on changes in read depth. For WGS, other methods to identify CNVs include utilizing discordant read pairs and split reads and genome-wide local assembly with tools such as Lumpy and SvABA, respectively. Here, we introduce a new method to identify deletion CNVs from WES and WGS trio dat ...[more]

PMID: 29527824

Similar Datasets

Project description:INDELs, especially those disrupting protein-coding regions of the genome, have been strongly associated with human diseases. However, there are still many errors with INDEL variant calling, driven by library preparation, sequencing biases, and algorithm artifacts.We characterized whole genome sequencing (WGS), whole exome sequencing (WES), and PCR-free sequencing data from the same samples to investigate the sources of INDEL errors. We also developed a classification scheme based on the coverage and composition to rank high and low quality INDEL calls. We performed a large-scale validation experiment on 600 loci, and find high-quality INDELs to have a substantially lower error rate than low-quality INDELs (7% vs. 51%).Simulation and experimental data show that assembly based callers are significantly more sensitive and robust for detecting large INDELs (>5 bp) than alignment based callers, consistent with published data. The concordance of INDEL detection between WGS and WES is low (53%), and WGS data uniquely identifies 10.8-fold more high-quality INDELs. The validation rate for WGS-specific INDELs is also much higher than that for WES-specific INDELs (84% vs. 57%), and WES misses many large INDELs. In addition, the concordance for INDEL detection between standard WGS and PCR-free sequencing is 71%, and standard WGS data uniquely identifies 6.3-fold more low-quality INDELs. Furthermore, accurate detection with Scalpel of heterozygous INDELs requires 1.2-fold higher coverage than that for homozygous INDELs. Lastly, homopolymer A/T INDELs are a major source of low-quality INDEL calls, and they are highly enriched in the WES data.Overall, we show that accuracy of INDEL detection with WGS is much greater than WES even in the targeted region. We calculated that 60X WGS depth of coverage from the HiSeq platform is needed to recover 95% of INDELs detected by Scalpel. While this is higher than current sequencing practice, the deeper coverage may save total project costs because of the greater accuracy and sensitivity. Finally, we investigate sources of INDEL errors (for example, capture deficiency, PCR amplification, homopolymers) with various data that will serve as a guideline to effectively reduce INDEL errors in genome sequencing.

Dataset Information

Robust identification of deletions in exome and genome sequence data based on clustering of Mendelian errors.

Publications

Robust identification of deletions in exome and genome sequence data based on clustering of Mendelian errors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets