Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42535048›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2026

Synth4bench: generating synthetic data for benchmarking tumor-only somatic variant calling algorithms.

Styliani-Christina Fragkouli, Nikos Pechlivanis, Anastasia Anastasiadou, Georgios Karakatsoulis, Aspasia Orfanou, Panagoula Kollia, Andreas Agathangelidis, Fotis Psomopoulos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Styliani-Christina FragkouliDepartment of Biology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Nikos PechlivanisInstitute of Applied Biosciences, Centre for Research and Technology Hellas, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Anastasia AnastasiadouInstitute of Applied Biosciences, Centre for Research and Technology Hellas, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Georgios KarakatsoulisInstitute of Applied Biosciences, Centre for Research and Technology Hellas, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Aspasia OrfanouInstitute of Applied Biosciences, Centre for Research and Technology Hellas, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Panagoula KolliaDepartment of Biology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Andreas AgathangelidisDepartment of Biology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Fotis PsomopoulosInstitute of Applied Biosciences, Centre for Research and Technology Hellas, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Somatic variant calling is a key activity towards identifying genomic alterations; yet, the evaluation of the respective tools remains challenging due to the scarcity of high quality ground truth datasets. To overcome this limitation, we developed synth4bench, a synthetic data generation pipeline, which utilizes the NEAT simulator, for robust benchmarking. Using a systematic process to create distinct synthetic datasets, we thoroughly evaluated five variant callers (Mutect2, FreeBayes, VarDict, VarScan2 and LoFreq). We compared tool outputs against our synthetic ground truth across key sequencing aspects (such as depth and read length) to assess their capacities and shed light on their underlying algorithmic principles. Results: Synth4bench is an approach for evaluating tumor-only somatic variant callers that relies on a systematic definition of fully controlled ground-truth datasets. Our analysis revealed significant inconsistencies among the tool outputs and a strong dependence of caller performance on sequencing parameters. Indels remain the hardest-to-call variant type, driven by errors at low allele frequencies. Algorithmic choice is also critical; the most robust callers displayed the highest Precision in allele frequency estimation, while the most sensitive caller was best for maximizing true positive recovery. Conversely, the least suitable caller exhibited systematic errors along with the poorest overall performance. Conclusion: These findings indicate that there is not a one-size-fits-all approach; sequencing optimization together with caller selection are necessary to maximize sensitivity and reliability. Furthermore, the pronounced inconsistencies suggest that current algorithms are not yet able to capture all mutational mechanisms adequately, with the modeling of the underlying processes remaining an open challenge.

Indexed as

benchmarkinggenomicssoftwaresynthetic datavariant calling

Identifiers

PMID42535048
PMCPMC13422537

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.