ArticlePloS one2018
A database of simulated tumor genomes towards accurate detection of somatic small variants in cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- MOV&RSim: computational modelling of cancer-specific variants and sequencing reads characteristics for realistic tumoral sample simulation.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Mutect2, Strelka2, and FreeBayes for Somatic SNV Detection in Synthetic and Clinical Whole-Exome Sequencing Data.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Integrated approach to generate artificial samples with low tumor fraction for somatic variant calling benchmarking.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- 2-kupl: mapping-free variant detection from DNA-seq data of matched samples.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Review
- A validated lineage-derived somatic truth data set enables benchmarking in cancer genome analysis.Communications biology · 2020Article
- Eleven grand challenges in single-cell data science.Genome biology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Somatic mutations promote the transformation of normal cells to cancer. Accurate identification of such mutations facilitates cancer diagnosis and treatment, but biological and technological noises, including intra-tumor heterogeneity, sample contamination, uncertainties in base sequencing and read alignment, pose a big challenge to somatic mutation discovery. A number of callers have been developed to predict them from paired tumor/normal or unpaired tumor sequencing data. However, the small size of currently available experimentally validated somatic sites limits evaluation and then improvement of callers. Fortunately, NIST reference material NA12878 genome has been well-characterized with publicly available high-confidence genotype calls, and biological and technological noises can be computationally generalized to the number of sub-clones, the VAFs, the sequencing and mapping qualities. We used BAMSurgeon to create simulated tumors by introducing somatic small variants (SNVs and small indels) into homozygous reference or wildtype sites of NA12878. We generated 135 simulated tumors from 5 pre-tumors/normals. These simulated tumors vary in sequencing and subsequent mapping error profiles, read length, the number of sub-clones, the VAF, the mutation frequency across the genome and the genomic context. Furthermore, these pure tumor/normal pairs can be mixed at desired ratios within each pair to simulate sample contamination. This database (a total size of 15 terabytes) will be of great use to benchmark somatic small variant callers and guide their improvement.
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.