Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29697369›Full record

ArticleBMC medical genomics2018

EAGLE: Explicit Alternative Genome Likelihood Evaluator.

Tony Kuo, Martin C Frith, Jun Sese, Paul Horton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Involvement of Rev1 in alkylating agent-induced loss of heterozygosity in Oryzias latipes.Genes to cells : devoted to molecular & cellular mechanisms · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tony KuoArtificial Intelligence Research Center, AIST, 2-3-26 Aomi, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-0064, Japan.
Martin C FrithArtificial Intelligence Research Center, AIST, 2-3-26 Aomi, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-0064, Japan.
Jun SeseArtificial Intelligence Research Center, AIST, 2-3-26 Aomi, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-0064, Japan.
Paul HortonArtificial Intelligence Research Center, AIST, 2-3-26 Aomi, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-0064, Japan. paulh@iscb.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliable detection of genome variations, especially insertions and deletions (indels), from single sample DNA sequencing data remains challenging, partially due to the inherent uncertainty involved in aligning sequencing reads to the reference genome. In practice a variety of ad hoc quality filtering methods are employed to produce more reliable lists of putative variants, but the resulting lists typically still include numerous false positives. Thus it would be desirable to be able to rigorously evaluate the degree to which each putative variant is supported by the data. Unfortunately, users who wish to do this, e.g. for the purpose of prioritizing validation experiments, have been faced with limited options.

resultsHere we present EAGLE, a method for evaluating the degree to which sequencing data supports a given candidate genome variant. EAGLE incorporates candidate variants into explicit hypotheses about the individual's genome, and then computes the probability of the observed data (the sequencing reads) under each hypothesis. In comparison with methods which rely heavily on a particular alignment of the reads to the reference genome, EAGLE readily accounts for uncertainties that may arise from multi-mapping or local misalignment and uses the entire length of each read. We compared the scores assigned by several well-known variant callers to EAGLE for the task of ranking true putative variants on both simulated data and real genome sequencing based benchmarks. For indels, EAGLE obtained marked improvement on simulated data and a whole genome sequencing benchmark, and modest but statistically significant improvement on an exome sequencing benchmark.

conclusionsEAGLE ranked true variants higher than the scores reported by the callers and can used to improve specificity in variant calling. EAGLE is freely available at https://github.com/tony-kuo/eagle .

Indexed as

GenomicsHaplotypesHumansLikelihood FunctionsProbabilitySoftwareGenerative probabilistic modelsGenomic variantsNext generation sequencing data analysisVariant callingVariant quality score

Identifiers

PMID29697369
PMCPMC5918433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.