Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32732891›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

SomaticCombiner: improving the performance of somatic variant calling based on evaluation tests and a consensus approach.

Mingyi Wang, Wen Luo, Kristine Jones, Xiaopeng Bian, Russell Williams, Herbert Higson, Dongjing Wu, Belynda Hicks, Meredith Yeager, Bin Zhu

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Identifying genetic errors of immunity due to mosaicism.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Mingyi WangCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA. mingyi.wang@nih.gov.
Wen LuoCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Kristine JonesCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Xiaopeng BianCenter for Biomedical Informatics and Information Technology, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA.
Russell WilliamsCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Herbert HigsonCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Dongjing WuCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Belynda HicksCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Meredith YeagerCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA.
Bin ZhuCancer Genomics Research Laboratory, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, 20877, USA. bin.zhu2@nih.gov.

Funding

CCR NIH HHS HHSN261200800001CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261200800001E
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is challenging to identify somatic variants from high-throughput sequence reads due to tumor heterogeneity, sub-clonality, and sequencing artifacts. In this study, we evaluated the performance of eight primary somatic variant callers and multiple ensemble methods using both real and synthetic whole-genome sequencing, whole-exome sequencing, and deep targeted sequencing datasets with the NA12878 cell line. The test results showed that a simple consensus approach can significantly improve performance even with a limited number of callers and is more robust and stable than machine learning based ensemble approaches. To fully exploit the multi-callers, we also developed a software package, SomaticCombiner, that can combine multiple callers and integrates a new variant allelic frequency (VAF) adaptive majority voting approach, which can maintain sensitive detection for variants with low VAFs.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDatabases, Nucleic AcidExomePolymorphism, Single NucleotideSoftwareComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID32732891
PMCPMC7393490

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.