Back

Deletion detection in SARS-CoV-2 genomes using multiplex-PCR sequencing from COVID-19 patients: elimination of false positives

Jiang, N.; Dewey, C. N.; Yin, J.

2025-04-16 infectious diseases
10.1101/2025.04.15.25325794 medRxiv
Show abstract

Deletions are prevalent in the genomes of SARS-CoV-2 isolates from COVID-19 patients, but their roles in the severity, transmission, and persistence of disease are poorly understood. Millions of COVID-19 swab samples from patients have been sequenced and made available online, offering an unprecedented opportunity to study such deletions. Multiplex PCR-based amplicon sequencing (amplicon-seq) has been the most widely used method for sequencing clinical COVID-19 samples. However, existing bioinformatics methods applied to negative control samples sequenced by multiplex-PCR sequencing often yield large numbers of false-positive deletions. We found that these false positives commonly occur in short alignments, at low frequency and depth, and near primer-binding sites used for whole-genome amplification. To address this issue, we developed a filtering strategy, validated with positive control samples containing a known deletion. Our strategy accurately detected the known deletion and removed more than 99% of false positives. This method, applied to public COVID-19 swab data, revealed that deletions occurring independently of transcription regulatory sequences were about 20-fold less common than previously reported; however, they remain more frequent in symptomatic patients. Our optimized approach should enhance the reliability of SARS-CoV-2 deletion characterization from surveillance studies. Finally, our approach may guide the development of more reliable bioinformatics pipelines for genome sequence analyses of other viruses.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.