ArticleBMC genomics2016
SNooPer: a machine learning-based method for somatic variant identification from low-pass next-generation sequencing.
Article in BMC genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Predicting high confidence ctDNA somatic variants with ensemble machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
- A Transformers-based framework for refinement of genetic variants.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Characterisation of FLT3 alterations in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.British journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Improved detection of low-frequency within-host variants from deep sequencing: A case study with human papillomavirus.Virus evolution · 2024Article
- Evaluating the performance of low-frequency variant calling tools for the detection of variants from short-read deep sequencing data.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- RFcaller: a machine learning approach combined with read-level features to detect somatic mutations.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2023Article
- mitoSomatic: a tool for accurate identification of mitochondrial DNA somatic mutations without paired controls.Molecular oncology · 2023Article
- Validation of genetic variants from NGS data using deep convolutional neural networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Utilizing immunogenomic approaches to prioritize targetable neoantigens for personalized cancer immunotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Artificial intelligence and database for NGS-based diagnosis in rare disease.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Review
- What makes TMB an ambivalent biomarker for immunotherapy? A subtle mismatch between the sample-based design of variant callers and real clinical cohort.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Somatic and Germline Variant Calling from Next-Generation Sequencing Data.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Semi-supervised learning for somatic variant calling and peptide identification in personalized cancer immunotherapy.BMC bioinformatics · 2020Article
- SomaticCombiner: improving the performance of somatic variant calling based on evaluation tests and a consensus approach.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Genome-wide cell-free DNA mutational integration enables ultra-sensitive cancer monitoring.Nature medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- BATCAVE: calling somatic mutations with a tumor- and site-specific prior.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2020Article
- Comprehensive Outline of Whole Exome Sequencing Data Analysis Tools Available in Clinical Oncology.Cancers · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) allows unbiased, in-depth interrogation of cancer genomes. Many somatic variant callers have been developed yet accurate ascertainment of somatic variants remains a considerable challenge as evidenced by the varying mutation call rates and low concordance among callers. Statistical model-based algorithms that are currently available perform well under ideal scenarios, such as high sequencing depth, homogeneous tumor samples, high somatic variant allele frequency (VAF), but show limited performance with sub-optimal data such as low-pass whole-exome/genome sequencing data. While the goal of any cancer sequencing project is to identify a relevant, and limited, set of somatic variants for further sequence/functional validation, the inherently complex nature of cancer genomes combined with technical issues directly related to sequencing and alignment can affect either the specificity and/or sensitivity of most callers.
resultsFor these reasons, we developed SNooPer, a versatile machine learning approach that uses Random Forest classification models to accurately call somatic variants in low-depth sequencing data. SNooPer uses a subset of variant positions from the sequencing output for which the class, true variation or sequencing error, is known to train the data-specific model. Here, using a real dataset of 40 childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients, we show how the SNooPer algorithm is not affected by low coverage or low VAFs, and can be used to reduce overall sequencing costs while maintaining high specificity and sensitivity to somatic variant calling. When compared to three benchmarked somatic callers, SNooPer demonstrated the best overall performance.
conclusionsWhile the goal of any cancer sequencing project is to identify a relevant, and limited, set of somatic variants for further sequence/functional validation, the inherently complex nature of cancer genomes combined with technical issues directly related to sequencing and alignment can affect either the specificity and/or sensitivity of most callers. The flexibility of SNooPer's random forest protects against technical bias and systematic errors, and is appealing in that it does not rely on user-defined parameters. The code and user guide can be downloaded at https://sourceforge.net/projects/snooper/ .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.