Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • fourie.joubert@up.ac.za
    Junior Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 1

    #1

    Ion Torrent Ampliseq: duplicate removal / coverage / variants?

    Hi Folks

    I would love to get some opinions regarding duplicate removal during variant calling for the AmpliSeq Comprehensive Cancer Panel.

    I have noted some previous discussions on the topic on this forum, but I am experiencing some additional issues.

    We have been doing tumor vs. normal samples, and do the realignment and base quality score recalibration steps (no duplicate removal) using GATK. We are currently testing a variety of somatic variant callers (Strelka, VarScan, MuTect, JointSNVMix, SomaticSniper).

    Ion Torrent states the following:

    "Marking duplicate reads is not appropriate for Ion AmpliSeq data, because many independent reads are expected to share the same 5' alignment position and 3' adapter flow as each other. Marking duplicates on an Ion AmpliSeq run risks inappropriately flagging many reads that are in fact independent of one another."

    When doing visual inspection of (possibly) variant positions in IGV, a lot of the variants seem to have been called based on read depth that sure look like duplicates upon inspection. There also seems to be a trend for variant positions to be at the edges of these reads .

    However, if I do duplicate removal, my average coverage drops from 300x to 9x.

    The duplicate reads vs. true coverage depth obviously has quite serious implications for all variant calling statistics...

    Any advice / opinions / debate would be much appreciated.

    Best regards!

    Fourie
  • Bukowski
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2010
    • 388

    #2
    Well it's exactly like IonTorrent advise - you can't deduplicate amplicon data on any platform, neither can you do it with HaloPlex.

    This means it is impossible to remove PCR artefacts from the data. This is why I much prefer hybridisation capture for these kind of studies, as deduplication is required to keep that source of false positives under control.

    My best advice is if you're stuck with this system, run samples in duplicate - at least then if you have false positives from the amplification, they shouldn't be present in the other replicate.

    Comment

    • nbahlis
      Member
      • May 2013
      • 25

      #3
      I have the same problem. Is there a way to rum Mutect without removing duplicates (or presumed duplicates)?

      Comment

      • IonTom
        Member
        • Apr 2014
        • 32

        #4
        You can use the VariantTools Biocondctor package, this gives you the
        number of unique in read positions for variant and reference. Using a GenomicRanges object generated from a vcf you can make it report specifically for the positions of interest. This can be done using the tally function.

        Comment

        • IonTom
          Member
          • Apr 2014
          • 32

          #5
          Here is the code:

          library(gmapR)
          library(VariantTools)
          library(VariantAnnotation)
          library(BiocParallel)

          biocParam <- MulticoreParam(workers = ncores)

          fastaFile <- rtracklayer::FastaFile(referencefile)
          gmapGenome <- GmapGenome(fastaFile, create=TRUE,directory = referencefolder)

          print(tallied)

          vcf = readVcf(vcffile)
          called <- as(unlist(vcf),"VRanges")


          tally.param <- TallyVariantsParam(gmapGenome, high_base_quality = 0L,minimum_mapq = 10L,
          which = unique(as(called,"GRanges")),ignore_duplicates = FALSE,read_pos_breaks = c(1,10,120,330),
          variant_strand = 1)


          tallied = tallyVariants(bam_file,tally.param,BPPARAM = biocParam)
          matched = called %in% tallied
          matched_tallied = tallied %in% called

          cur_called = called[matched]
          tallied = unique(tallied[matched_tallied])

          sampleNames(tallied) = sampleNames(cur_called)

          elementMetadata(tallied) = c(elementMetadata(cur_called),elementMetadata(tallied))

          print(tallied)
          Last edited by IonTom; 07-07-2014, 09:37 AM.

          Comment

          • dakl
            Member
            • May 2009
            • 15

            #6
            Originally posted by nbahlis View Post
            I have the same problem. Is there a way to rum Mutect without removing duplicates (or presumed duplicates)?
            Yes, just skip the dedup step. It's just an upstream step to skip.

            Comment

            • quantrix
              Member
              • Jan 2011
              • 21

              #7
              Hi Fourie,
              I was wondering what you ended up doing in terms of variant calling with the Ion CCP panel data? Did you just end up using the torrent variant caller? If so, how did you do the downstream analysis for filtering the variants etc? Did you use Ion Reporter?
              I find it quite incredible that the Ion data seems to be quite incompatible with ANY of the variant callers like Mutect, Varscan to do paired tumor normal analysis.
              Thanks for the favor of a reply.
              Regards

              Comment

              Latest Articles

              Collapse

              • SEQadmin2
                Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
                by SEQadmin2



                Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

                Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
                ...
                10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
              • SEQadmin2
                New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
                by SEQadmin2


                Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

                We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
                ...
                09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

              ad_right_rmr

              Collapse

              News

              Collapse

              Topics Statistics Last Post
              Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
              0 responses
              28 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
              0 responses
              36 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 10-13-2026, 09:56 AM
              0 responses
              31 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 10-09-2026, 11:14 AM
              0 responses
              29 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Working...