ArticleBMC bioinformatics2022
CNVind: an open source cloud-based pipeline for rare CNVs detection in whole exome sequencing data based on the depth of coverage.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Genetic Testing in Adult CKD.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2024Article
- Genetic interrogation for sequence and copy number variants in systemic lupus erythematosus.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- InEJIFCC · 2023Article
- Different Strategies for Counting the Depth of Coverage in Copy Number Variation Calling Tools.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2022Article
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
Abstract
backgroundA typical Copy Number Variations (CNVs) detection process based on the depth of coverage in the Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) data consists of several steps: (I) calculating the depth of coverage in sequencing regions, (II) quality control, (III) normalizing the depth of coverage, (IV) calling CNVs. Previous tools performed one normalization process for each chromosome-all the coverage depths in the sequencing regions from a given chromosome were normalized in a single run.
methodsHerein, we present the new CNVind tool for calling CNVs, where the normalization process is conducted separately for each of the sequencing regions. The total number of normalizations is equal to the number of sequencing regions in the investigated dataset. For example, when analyzing a dataset composed of n sequencing regions, CNVind performs n independent depth of coverage normalizations. Before each normalization, the application selects the k most correlated sequencing regions with the depth of coverage Pearson's Correlation as distance metric. Then, the resulting subgroup of [Formula: see text] sequencing regions is normalized, the results of all n independent normalizations are combined; finally, the segmentation and CNV calling process is performed on the resultant dataset. RESULTS AND
conclusionsWe used WES data from the 1000 Genomes project to evaluate the impact of independent normalization on CNV calling performance and compared the results with state-of-the-art tools: CODEX and exomeCopy. The results proved that independent normalization allows to improve the rare CNVs detection specificity significantly. For example, for the investigated dataset, we reduced the number of FP calls from over 15,000 to around 5000 while maintaining a constant number of TP calls equal to about 150 CNVs. However, independent normalization of each sequencing region is a computationally expensive process, therefore our pipeline is customized and can be easily run in the cloud computing environment, on the computer cluster, or the single CPU server. To our knowledge, the presented application is the first attempt to implement an innovative approach to independent normalization of the depth of WES data coverage.
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.