paperKB
coga / coga-kb
Help
Sign in

Chunk #26 — RESULTS — Comparison to other methods

Source
Sensitive detection of somatic point mutations in impure and heterogeneous cancer samples.
Embedded
yes

Text

We evaluated the sensitivity of the methods with regard to allele fraction and tumor sequencing depth using the virtual tumor (Fig. 4a) and downsampling (Supplementary Fig. 6) approaches, and observed a sharp distinction in sensitivity, particularly at lower allele fractions. We analyzed data for 30x sequence coverage. In the standard configurations, all methods show ≥ 99.3% sensitivity for mutations at an allele fraction of 0.4. However, in the HC configurations, MuTect, JointSNVMix and Strelka remain sensitive, 98.8%, 96.6% and 98.5% respectively, whereas SomaticSniper drops to 91.5%. At an allele fraction of 0.1, MuTect HC can detect more than half of the mutations (53.2%), whereas Strelka HC detects only 29.7%, JointSNVMix HC drops to 16.8% and SomaticSniper HC falls to 7.4%. At an even lower allele fraction of 0.05, MuTect HC has 16.0% sensitivity but can be increased to 51.9% with 60x coverage. By contrast, JointSNVMix HC and SomaticSniper HC have a sensitivity of ≤ 2.0%, and the sensitivity does not increase appreciably with tumor sequencing depth. Strelka HC detects just 4.6% of the events at 30x and only increases to