Abstract:Background: High-throughput sequencing has rapidly become an essential part of precision cancer medicine. But validating results obtained from analyzing and interpreting genomic data remains a rate-limiting factor. The gold standard, of course, remains manual validation by expert panels, which is not without its weaknesses, namely high costs in both funding and time as well as the necessarily selective nature of manual validation. But it may be possible to develop more economical, complementary means of validation. In this study we employed four synthetic data sets (variants with known mutations spiked into specific genomic locations) of increasing complexity to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy of five open-source variant callers: FreeBayes v1.0, VarDict v11.5.1, MuTect v1.1.7, MuTect2, and MuSE v1.0rc. FreeBayes, VarDict, and MuTect were run in bcbio-next gen, and the results were integrated into a single Ensemble call set. The known mutations provided a level of "ground truth" against which we evaluated variant-caller performance. We further facilitated the comparison and evaluation by segmenting the whole genome into 10,000,000 base-pair fragments which yielded 316 segments. Results: Differences among the numbers of true positives were small among the callers, but the numbers of false positives varied much more when the tools were used to analyze sets one through three. Both FreeBayes and VarDict produced strikingly more false positives than did the others, although VarDict, somewhat paradoxically also produced the highest number of true positives. The Ensemble approach yielded results characterized by higher specificity and balanced accuracy and fewer false positives than did any of the five tools used alone. Sensitivity and specificity, however, declined for all five callers as the complexity of the data sets increased, but we did not uncover anything more than limited, weak correlations between caller performance and certain DNA structural features: gene density and guanine-cytosine content. Altogether, MuTect2 performed the best among the callers tested, followed by MuSE and MuTect. Conclusions: Spiking data sets with specific mutations -single-nucleotide variations (SNVs), single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), or structural variations (SVs) in this study-at known locations in the genome provides an effective and economical way to compare data analyzed by variant callers with ground truth. The method constitutes a viable alternative to the prolonged, expensive, and noncomprehensive assessment by expert panels. It should be further developed and refined, as should other comparatively "lightweight" methods of assessing accuracy. Given that the scientific community has not yet established gold standards for validating NGS-related technologies such as variant callers, developing multiple alternative means for verifying variant-caller accuracy will eventually lead to the establishment of higher-quality standards than could be achieved by prematurely limiting the range of innovative methods explored by members of the community.

Comprehensive evaluation and characterisation of short read general-purpose structural variant calling software

Comprehensive Evaluation of Structural Variant Genotyping Methods Based on Long-Read Sequencing Data.

Comparison of structural variant callers for massive whole-genome sequence data

Tradeoffs in alignment and assembly-based methods for structural variant detection with long-read sequencing data

Comparing the performance of selected variant callers using synthetic data and genome segmentation

Systematic Comparative Analysis of Single-Nucleotide Variant Detection Methods from Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Data

Systematic assessment of structural variant annotation tools for genomic interpretation

Comprehensive and deep evaluation of structural variation detection pipelines with third-generation sequencing data

Systematic benchmark of state-of-the-art variant calling pipelines identifies major factors affecting accuracy of coding sequence variant discovery

Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data

Structural variant calling: the long and the short of it

Comparative Analysis of Structural Variant Callers on the Short-Read Whole-Genome Sequencing Data

Hidden Biases in Germline Structural Variant Detection.

SVSR: A Program to Simulate Structural Variations and Generate Sequencing Reads for Multiple Platforms

A Comparison of Structural Variant Calling from Short-Read and Nanopore-Based Whole-Genome Sequencing Using Optical Genome Mapping as a Benchmark

A Benchmark of Genetic Variant Calling Pipelines Using Metagenomic Short-Read Sequencing

Benchmarking variant callers in next-generation and third-generation sequencing analysis

cascAGS: Comparative Analysis of SNP Calling Methods for Human Genome Data in the Absence of Gold Standard

Comprehensive assessment of long-read sequencing platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variation

VISTA: an integrated framework for structural variant discovery

Abstract 2338: Benchmarking long- and short-read somatic structural variation callers using a multi-technology panel of six tumor/normal cell lines