Published in

Oxford University Press, Bioinformatics, 12(38), p. 3181-3191, 2022

DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac306

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3705632

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Detection of Oncogenic and Clinically Actionable Mutations in Cancer Genomes Critically Depends on Variant Calling Tools

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractMotivationThe analysis of cancer genomes provides fundamental information about its etiology, the processes driving cell transformation or potential treatments. While researchers and clinicians are often only interested in the identification of oncogenic mutations, actionable variants or mutational signatures, the first crucial step in the analysis of any tumor genome is the identification of somatic variants in cancer cells (i.e. those that have been acquired during their evolution). For that purpose, a wide range of computational tools have been developed in recent years to detect somatic mutations in sequencing data from tumor samples. While there have been some efforts to benchmark somatic variant calling tools and strategies, the extent to which variant calling decisions impact the results of downstream analyses of tumor genomes remains unknown.ResultsHere, we quantify the impact of variant calling decisions by comparing the results obtained in three important analyses of cancer genomics data (identification of cancer driver genes, quantification of mutational signatures and detection of clinically actionable variants) when changing the somatic variant caller (MuSE, MuTect2, SomaticSniper and VarScan2) or the strategy to combine them (Consensus of two, Consensus of three and Union) across all 33 cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Our results show that variant calling decisions have a significant impact on these analyses, creating important differences that could even impact treatment decisions for some patients. Moreover, the Consensus of three calling strategy to combine the output of multiple variant calling tools, a very widely used strategy by the research community, can lead to the loss of some cancer driver genes and actionable mutations. Overall, our results highlight the limitations of widespread practices within the cancer genomics community and point to important differences in critical analyses of tumor sequencing data depending on variant calling, affecting even the identification of clinically actionable variants.Availability and implementationCode is available at https://github.com/carlosgarciaprieto/VariantCallingClinicalBenchmark.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.