Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2019.12.18.881870

Finding a suitable library size to call variants in RNA-seq

Abstract

BackgroundRNA-Seq allows the study of both gene expression changes and transcribed mutations, providing a highly effective way to gain insight into cancer biology. When planning the sequencing of a large cohort of samples, library size is a fundamental factor affecting both the overall cost and the quality of the results. While several studies analyse the effect that library size has on differential expression analyses, sensitivity analysis for variant detection has received far less attention. ResultsWe simulated shallower sequencing depths by downsampling 45 AML samples that are part of the Leucegene project, which were originally sequenced at high depth. We compared the sensitivity of six methods of recovering validated mutations on the same samples. The methods compared are a combination of three popular callers (MuTect, VarScan, and VarDict) and two filtering strategies. We observed an incremental loss in sensitivity when simulating libraries of 80M, 50M, 40M, 30M and 20M fragments, with the largest loss detected with less than 30M fragments (below 90%). The sensitivity in recovering indels varied markedly between callers, with VarDict showing the highest sensitivity (60%). Single nucleotide variant sensitivity is relatively consistent across methods, apart from MuTect, whose default filters need adjustment when using RNA-Seq. We also analysed 136 RNA-Seq samples from the TCGA-LAML cohort, assessing the change in sensitivity between the initial libraries (average 59M fragments) and after downsampling to 40M fragments. When considering single nucleotide variants in recurrently mutated myeloid genes we found a comparable performance, with a 3% average loss in sensitivity using 40M fragments. ConclusionsBetween 30M and 40M fragments are needed to recover 90%-95% of the initial variants on recurrently mutated myeloid genes. To extend this result to another cancer type, an exploration of the characteristics of its mutations and gene expression patterns is suggested.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Quaglieri, A., Flensburg, C., Speed, T. P., Majewski, I. J.. 2019-12-19. Finding a suitable library size to call variants in RNA-seq. https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.18.881870

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Comparative functional genomics reveals distributed SERPINE1 like characteristics among Drosophila serpins

Serpins (serine protease inhibitors) regulate proteolytic activity through a suicide-substrate inhibitory mechanism, whereby the serpin covalently traps and inactivates their target protease. Serpins are broadly conserved across eukaryotes, but the evolutionary and functional relationships between human SERPINE1, and Drosophila Serpins in incompletely defined. To identify candidate Drosophila functional analogs of SERPINE1/PAI-1, a multi-omics framework was applied to thoroughly compare the serpins across species. The multi-level analysis integrated orthology prediction, protein sequence and structural characterization, phylogenetic reconstruction, bulk tissue transcriptomics, single-cell transcriptomics, and aging-associated expression analysis. Candidate serpins (Spn42Da, Spn42Db, Spn42Dc, Spn42Dd, Spn28B, and Spn28F) were evaluated using DIOPT, AlphaFold/ChimeraX structural comparisons, reactive center loop analyses, phylogenetic distances, GTEx, Human Protein Atlas, FlyAtlas2, Fly Cell Atlas, and Aging Fly Cell Atlas datasets. Comparative analyses demonstrated full-length sequence and reactive center loop (RCL) divergence despite preservation of the canonical serpin fold. Tissue, cell-type, and age-associated expression analysis revealed distinct candidate-specific patterns. Spn42Dd comparisons uncovered similarities to human SERPINE1 in sequence/structural and broad expression but did not represent the strongest overall cross-species expression correlations. Spn42Da and Spn42Db received the highest cross species integrated support. Quality check of the ranking confirmed that Spn42Da and Spn42Db were stable top candidates across orthology, sequence alignment, and expression domains. The multi-domain analysis was unable to identify a single definitive Drosophila serpin as the closest counterpart to human SERPINE1, indicating that cross-species similarity is distributed across multiple candidate serpins. This study therefore provides a quantitative method for prioritizing potential evolutionary and functional analogs across highly divergent species.

bioinformatics↗

CellChat Hotspot: A Targeted Approach to Cell Cell Communication Analysis With Spatial transcriptomics Validation.

Abstract. In recent years, single cell RNA sequencing (scRNA seq) has enabled the investigation of intercellular communication through Cell Cell Communication (CCC) tools such as CellChat. Despite their potential, these approaches remain challenging to interpret, particularly when global analyses generate complex interaction networks that may include biologically irrelevant signals. To address this limitation, we developed a framework termed CellChat Hotspot, designed to improve the biological interpretability of inferred communication networks. This approach integrates gene set enrichment analysis with a context driven filtering strategy, selecting both genes and cells based on their functional relevance prior to communication inference. Applied to stage II colon cancer data, CellChat Hotspot enabled the identification of condition-specific interaction patterns associated with recurrence. Non recurrent patients showed enrichment of immune related processes, whereas recurrent cases were characterized by pathways associated with invasion and metastasis. Notably, a loss of interaction in the HSPG pathway between CALB1+ and stromal cells was observed in recurrent patients, suggesting a potential disruption of cell matrix adhesion mechanisms. To verify the reliability of this finding, we applied the framework to spatial transcriptomics data, which confirmed the presence of the HSPG2 DAG1 interaction in non-recurrent tumors and its near absence in recurrent ones. Overall, this framework provides a biologically guided strategy for studying intercellular communication in complex systems such as the tumor microenvironment.

bioinformatics↗

DiffTernary: a Diffusion Model for Molecular Glue Ternary Complex Docking

Molecular glues (MGs) modulate protein function by inducing or stabilizing protein interactions. However, accurately modeling MG ternary complexes remains challenging. Here, we present DiffTernary, a diffusion-based docking method for the joint prediction of relative protein arrangement and MG binding pose. We introduce Ternary-PDB, a dataset of 76,702 experimentally determined ternary complexes curated from the Protein Data Bank using structural filters and a release cutoff aligned with AlphaFold 3 (AF3). When trained on this dataset, DiffTernary achieved acceptable protein-protein interaction (PPI) predictions (DockQ > 0.23) for 50.0% of MGBench complexes with a single prediction, compared with 51.1% for AF3. In comparisons with AF3, OpenFold3, ESMFold2, Protenix-v1 and Protenix-v2, DiffTernary ranked second with a best-of-25 PPI prediction success rate of 78.4%, behind ESMFold2 (90.9%) and ahead of AF3 (72.7%). A separate DiffTernary model trained on TernaryDB achieved a mean DockQ of 0.306 on the 94 complexes in the TernaryDB MGD test set with a single prediction, compared with 0.228 for DeepTernary. Confidence-based selection among 40 samples yielded acceptable PPI predictions for 41.5% of complexes, compared with 30.9% for DeepTernary. An E2Former variant increased training and sampling throughput 6.90-fold and 4.37-fold, respectively, under the evaluated configurations. Together, DiffTernary and Ternary-PDB provide an efficient docking approach for MG complex prediction and a valuable structural resource for MG discovery and design.

bioinformatics↗