Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32631411›Full record

ArticleBMC medical genomics2020

Comparative analysis of somatic variant calling on matched FF and FFPE WGS samples.

Louise de Schaetzen van Brienen, Maarten Larmuseau, Kim Van der Eecken, Frederic De Ryck, Pauline Robbe, Anna Schuh, Jan Fostier, Piet Ost, Kathleen Marchal

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical genomics, 2020. 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
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Louise de Schaetzen van BrienenDepartment of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Department of Information Technology, IDLab, imec, iGent Toren, Ghent, Belgium.
Maarten LarmuseauDepartment of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Department of Information Technology, IDLab, imec, iGent Toren, Ghent, Belgium.
Kim Van der EeckenDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Frederic De RyckDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Pauline RobbeOxford National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Anna SchuhOxford National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Jan FostierDepartment of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Department of Information Technology, IDLab, imec, iGent Toren, Ghent, Belgium.
Piet OstDepartment of Radiotherapy, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Kathleen MarchalDepartment of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Department of Information Technology, IDLab, imec, iGent Toren, Ghent, Belgium. kathleen.marchal@ugent.be.ORCID 0000-0002-2169-4588
Ghent University Hospital · BEUniversity of Oxford · GBGhent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch grade Fresh Frozen (FF) DNA material is not yet routinely collected in clinical practice. Many hospitals, however, collect and store Formalin Fixed Paraffin Embedded (FFPE) tumor samples. Consequently, the sample size of whole genome cancer cohort studies could be increased tremendously by including FFPE samples, although the presence of artefacts might obfuscate the variant calling. To assess whether FFPE material can be used for cohort studies, we performed an in-depth comparison of somatic SNVs called on matching FF and FFPE Whole Genome Sequence (WGS) samples extracted from the same tumor.

methodsFour variant callers (i.e. Strelka2, Mutect2, VarScan2 and Shimmer) were used to call somatic variants on matching FF and FFPE WGS samples from a metastatic prostate tumor. Using the variants identified by these callers, we developed a heuristic to maximize the overlap between the FF and its FFPE counterpart in terms of sensitivity and precision. The proposed variant calling approach was then validated on nine matched primary samples. Finally, we assessed what fraction of the discrepancy could be attributed to intra-tumor heterogeneity (ITH), by comparing the overlap in clonal and subclonal somatic variants.

resultsWe first compared variants between an FF and an FFPE sample from a metastatic prostate tumor, showing that on average 50% of the calls in the FF are recovered in the FFPE sample, with notable differences between callers. Combining the variants of the different callers using a simple heuristic, increases both the precision and the sensitivity of the variant calling. Validating the heuristic on nine additional matched FF-FFPE samples, resulted in an average F1-score of 0.58 and an outperformance of any of the individual callers. In addition, we could show that part of the discrepancy between the FF and the FFPE samples can be attributed to ITH.

conclusionThis study illustrates that when using the correct variant calling strategy, the majority of clonal SNVs can be recovered in an FFPE sample with high precision and sensitivity. These results suggest that somatic variants derived from WGS of FFPE material can be used in cohort studies.

Indexed as

MutationBiomarkers, TumorDNA, NeoplasmFeasibility StudiesFormaldehydeGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalParaffin EmbeddingPrognosisProstatic NeoplasmsSpecimen HandlingTissue FixationBiomarkers, TumorDNA, NeoplasmFormaldehydeCohort studiesFFPEPrecision oncologySomatic variantsWGS

Identifiers

PMID32631411
PMCPMC7336445
OpenAlexW3039403288

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.