Processing UMI Datasets at High Accuracy and Efficiency with the Sentieon ctDNA Analysis Pipeline
Hu, J.; Jiang, C.; Huang, Y. S.; Chen, H.; Feng, H.; Freed, D.; Qu, Y.; Fan, R.; Su, Z.; Chen, W.
Show abstract
Liquid biopsy enables identification of low allele frequency (AF) tumor variants and novel clinical applications such as minimum residual disease (MRD) monitoring. However, challenges remain, primarily due to limited sample volume and low read count of low-AF variants. Because of the low AFs, some clinically significant variants are difficult to distinguish from errors introduced by PCR amplification and sequencing. Unique Molecular Identifiers (UMIs) have been developed to further reduce base error rates and improve the variant calling accuracy, which enables better discrimination between background errors and real somatic variants. While multiple UMI-aware ctDNA analysis pipelines have been published and adopted, their accuracy and runtime efficiency could be improved. In this study, we present the Sentieon ctDNA pipeline, a fast and accurate solution for small somatic variant calling from ctDNA sequencing data. The pipeline consists of four core modules: alignment, consensus generation, variant calling, and variant filtering. We benchmarked the ctDNA pipeline using both simulated and real datasets, and found that the Sentieon ctDNA pipeline is more accurate than alternatives.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating discordant somatic calls across mutation discovery approaches to minimize false negative drug-resistant findings 96%
- PanelCAT: an Open-Source Comparative Analysis Tool for Next-Generation Sequencing Panel Target Regions 95%
- Panel Informativity Optimizer (PIO): an R package to improve cancer NGS panel informativity 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.