Go Back   SEQanswers > Sequencing Technologies/Companies > Ion Torrent

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Variant calling using CRISP Aristotle General 0 04-05-2018 03:30 AM
My first variant calling workflow Eurioste Bioinformatics 0 06-30-2017 08:50 AM
Variant Calling with mpileup asebastian Bioinformatics 0 03-31-2013 08:53 PM
variant calling kjaja Bioinformatics 1 11-04-2011 07:16 AM

Thread Tools
Old 02-05-2019, 05:55 AM   #1
Junior Member
Location: UK

Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2
Default Correcting for deamination in variant calling


I'm calling variants using the TorrentSuite on DNA which has been sequenced from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. This has a major issue in that without addition of uracil-N-glycosylase, some of the Cs in the original DNA are deaminated to uracil, which upon sequencing and calling variants can show up as mutations, either as C>T transitions or G>A (from the opposite strand, due to PCR in the library prep). I do not have any idea how long these samples were stored without UNG before sequencing.

TVC gives a deamination metric (essentially, sum of C>T and G>A variants over all variants called), and for our samples, the highest value seen is ~0.92. Naively postprocessing the variants show that for these samples, C>T/T>C transitions overwhelm the remaining variants among my samples.

My question is this, given the IonTorrent variant calling pipeline (sequencing > BAM file > TVC > VCF file with deamination statistic), is there:

a) a way of correcting the output VCF, or
b) a set of filters to use in bcftools,

to reduce this effect on the samples?

My use case is this: these are medical samples, which have been inspected by a pathologist (hence the FFPE treatment), and I want to determine which variants are predictive* of outcome, hence I have two potentially contradictory goals: reduce false positives and capture the rarer variants which may hold predictive power.


*It's a retrospective trial, so 'predictive' in the sense of which variants correspond with outcomes
Attached Images
File Type: png a.png (7.1 KB, 4 views)

Last edited by geejaytee; 02-05-2019 at 07:37 AM. Reason: minor typos, add attachment; C->U->T, not T>C
geejaytee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2019, 06:28 AM   #2
Junior Member
Location: UK

Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2

They do not need correcting - as the deamination (C>T and G>A) damage is random, the predicted allele frequencies for these (false) calls will be small (<0.25, say), and will be of low quality. A simple filter on quality and allele fraction can then be used to filter these out as they cluster separately to the true variants.
geejaytee is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO