340 likes | 483 Views
Omixon Workshops. Considerations for Analyzing Targeted NGS Data - Introduction. Tim Hague, CEO. Targeted Data. Introduction. Many mapping, alignment and variant calling algorithms
E N D
OmixonWorkshops Considerations for Analyzing Targeted NGS Data - Introduction Tim Hague, CEO
Introduction • Many mapping, alignment and variant calling algorithms • Most of these have been developed for whole genome sequencing and to some extent population genetic studies
Premise • In contrast, NGS based diagnostics deals with particular genes or mutations of an individual • Different diagnostic targets present specific challenges
Goal Present analysis issues related to differences in: • Sequencing technologies • Targeting technologies • Target specifics • Pseudogenes and segmental duplication
NGS Sequencers • Illumina • Ion Torrent • Roche 454 • (SOLiD) Illumina Roche 454 IonTorrentt
Mind The Gap Moore B, Hu H, Singleton M, De La Vega, FM, Reese MG, Yandell M. Genet Med. 2011 Mar;13(3):210-7.
Sequencing Technology Differences: • Homopolymer error rates • G/C content errors • Read length • Sequencing protocols (single vs paired reads)
Targeting Methods • PCR primers (e.g. amplicons) • Hybridization probes (e.g. exome kits)
Targeting Technology Differences: • Exact matching regions vs regions with SNPs Results in: • Need for mapping against whole chromosomes to avoid false positives
Analysis Targets Differences: • Rate of polymorphism • Repetitive structures • Mutation profiles • G/C content • Single genes vs multi gene complexes
BRCA1/2 HLA CFTR 1/2000 1/29 1/2000 Distributionsof insertions and deletions Distribution of repeatelements
Segmental Duplications • Sometimes called Low Copy Repeats (LCRs) • Highly homologous, >95% sequence identity • Rare in most mammals • Comprise a large portion of the human genome (and other primate genomes) • Important for understanding HLA
Segmental Duplications • Many LCRs are concentrated in "hotspots„ • Recombinations in these regions are responsible for a wide range of disorders, including: • Charcot-Marie-Tooth syndrome type 1A • Hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies • Smith-Magenis syndrome • Potocki-Lupski syndrome
Data Analysis Tools Differences: • Detection rates of complex variants (sensitivity) • False positive rates (accuracy) • Speed • Ease of use Data analysisshouldn’t be likethis!
“Depending upon which tool you use, you can see pretty big differences between even the same genome called with different tools—nearly as big as the two Life Tech/Illumina genomes.” Mark Yandel in BioIT-World.com, June 8, 2011
Examples • Missing variants • SNPs, a DNP and deletions
Examples • Coverage differences
[0-96] [0-432] Four TimesExonCoverage
[0-10] [0-24] Higher ExomeCoverage
FirstConclusion Read accuracy is notthe limiting factorinaccuratevariantanalysis
Second Conclusion As variant density increases the performance of most tools goes down
Variant Calling • There are few popular variant callers: GATK, SAMtoolsmpileup, VarScan • The most comprehensive (GATK) has a whole pipeline, including a quality recalibration step and an indel realignment step • These recalibration and realignment steps are highly recommended to be run before any variant call • Deduplication and removing non-primary alignments may also be required
Variants That Can be Hardto Find • DNPs • TNPs • Small indels next to SNPs • 30+ bpindels • Homopolymerindels • Homopolymerindel and SNP together • Indels in palindromes • Dense regions of variants
Contact Tim Hague, CEO Omixon Biocomputing Solutions Tim.Hague@omixon.com +36 70 318 4878
Download our Omixon Target™ Evaluation Version Today omixon.com