Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33892748›Full record

ArticleBioData mining2021

Estimating sequencing error rates using families.

Kelley Paskov, Jae-Yoon Jung, Brianna Chrisman, Nate T Stockham, Peter Washington, Maya Varma, Min Woo Sun, Dennis P Wall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioData mining, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Method for Localizing Non-Reference Sequences to the Human Genome.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing
    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

8 authors.

Kelley PaskovDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. kpaskov@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5252-1401
Jae-Yoon JungDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Brianna ChrismanDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Nate T StockhamDepartment of Neuroscience, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Peter WashingtonDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Maya VarmaDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Min Woo SunDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Dennis P WallDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. dpwall@stanford.edu.

Funding

U.S. National Library of Medicine 5 T32 LM012409-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs next-generation sequencing technologies make their way into the clinic, knowledge of their error rates is essential if they are to be used to guide patient care. However, sequencing platforms and variant-calling pipelines are continuously evolving, making it difficult to accurately quantify error rates for the particular combination of assay and software parameters used on each sample. Family data provide a unique opportunity for estimating sequencing error rates since it allows us to observe a fraction of sequencing errors as Mendelian errors in the family, which we can then use to produce genome-wide error estimates for each sample.

resultsWe introduce a method that uses Mendelian errors in sequencing data to make highly granular per-sample estimates of precision and recall for any set of variant calls, regardless of sequencing platform or calling methodology. We validate the accuracy of our estimates using monozygotic twins, and we use a set of monozygotic quadruplets to show that our predictions closely match the consensus method. We demonstrate our method's versatility by estimating sequencing error rates for whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, and microarray datasets, and we highlight its sensitivity by quantifying performance increases between different versions of the GATK variant-calling pipeline. We then use our method to demonstrate that: 1) Sequencing error rates between samples in the same dataset can vary by over an order of magnitude. 2) Variant calling performance decreases substantially in low-complexity regions of the genome. 3) Variant calling performance in whole exome sequencing data decreases with distance from the nearest target region. 4) Variant calls from lymphoblastoid cell lines can be as accurate as those from whole blood. 5) Whole-genome sequencing can attain microarray-level precision and recall at disease-associated SNV sites.

conclusionGenotype datasets from families are powerful resources that can be used to make fine-grained estimates of sequencing error for any sequencing platform and variant-calling methodology.

Indexed as

FamiliesMicroarraySequencing errorWhole-exome sequencingWhole-genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID33892748
PMCPMC8063364

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.