4.8 Article

Rare variant detection using family-based sequencing analysis

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1222158110

关键词

DNA sequencing; single-nucleotide variant; variant calling; disease-gene study; Bayesian network

资金

  1. Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) [5U24 CA143883-04, 100329, P30 CA016672]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01EY016240]
  3. CPRIT [100329, 110324, CA016672, CA98543, CA054498]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Next-generation sequencing is revolutionizing genomic analysis, but this analysis can be compromised by high rates of missing true variants. To develop a robust statistical method capable of identifying variants that would otherwise not be called, we conducted sequence data simulations and both whole-genome and targeted sequencing data analysis of 28 families. Our method (Family-Based Sequencing Program, FamSeq) integrates Mendelian transmission information and raw sequencing reads. Sequence analysis using FamSeq reduced the number of false negative variants by 14-33% as assessed by HapMap sample genotype confirmation. In a large family affected with Wilms tumor, 84% of variants uniquely identified by FamSeq were confirmed by Sanger sequencing. In children with early-onset neurodevelopmental disorders from 26 families, de novo variant calls in disease candidate genes were corrected by FamSeq as Mendelian variants, and the number of uniquely identified variants in affected individuals increased proportionally as additional family members were included in the analysis. To gain insight into maximizing variant detection, we studied factors impacting actual improvements of family-based calling, including pedigree structure, allele frequency (common vs. rare variants), prior settings of minor allele frequency, sequence signal-to-noise ratio, and coverage depth (similar to 20x to >200x). These data will help guide the design, analysis, and interpretation of family-based sequencing studies to improve the ability to identify new disease-associated genes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据