Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LiLin
    Member
    • May 2011
    • 15

    One Question about Varscan

    Hi,I have one question about varscan.

    There is one position,I think somatic_status should be Somatic,but the result show it reference.Is there anybody can explain it ?Thank you!

    chr position T G 26 1 3.7% T 40 10 20% K Reference 1.0 0.04709966879527449 15 25 4 6
  • Jane M
    Senior Member
    • Aug 2011
    • 239

    #2
    Hi,

    I don't have an answer but something similar:
    chr1 16946535 T C 2 16 88,89% C 8 6 42,86% Y Germline 1.0 0.007696151924037949 1 7 1 5
    The "somatic p_vlaue" is 0.007 and I chose the threshold as 0.05 so it should be classified as "Somatic"...

    Comment

    • dkoboldt
      Member
      • Mar 2009
      • 62

      #3
      Hello LiLin,

      There are a few criteria used to determine the somatic status of a variant. In your case, it seems most likely that --somatic-p-value was something lower than 0.47, so the variant did not meet the threshold to be called Somatic. Would you mind providing three things?
      1.) The VarScan version you're running
      2.) The command you used including all parameters
      3.) The normal and tumor pileup/mpileup for that chromosome position (it's fine if you alter the chromosome name or position; we need the depth, bases, and qualities).

      Jane, in your example, the variant is not called Somatic because the variant allele frequency is higher in normal (89%) than in tumor (43%).

      Comment

      • LiLin
        Member
        • May 2011
        • 15

        #4
        Hi,dkoboldt.
        1.)VarScan.v2.2.5.jar
        2.)Parameters:--min-coverage 10 --min-coverage-normal 10 --min-coverage-tumor 10 --min-var-freq 0.1 --min-freq-for-hom 0.75 --somatic-p-value 0.0001 --min-avg-qual 0 --validation 1
        3.)
        tumor mpileup:
        chr7 126351120 t 50 g,.,gg,.,,,..g,,,,GG..G,,.,,,,...,,...,,,,,g,G..g, 6CDDCCDDDC%DECD%%D;<DC;C%DDDD%CEDCDEDD%DC%4CC;DDB%
        normal mpileup:
        chr7 126351120 t 27 .,$...,.,,,C.,.,,,.,....,,.. B%EDDDDD%C#DEE%E%DDDEDDCDAD

        Comment

        • Jane M
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2011
          • 239

          #5
          Originally posted by dkoboldt View Post
          Jane, in your example, the variant is not called Somatic because the variant allele frequency is higher in normal (89%) than in tumor (43%).
          Code:
          chr1 16946535 T C 2 16 88,89% C 8 6 42,86% Y Germline 1.0 0.007696151924037949 1 7 1 5
          Dan, do you mean that if I had something like
          Code:
          0 100 50 50
          it would be classified as germline ?
          For me (but I am not biologist), it's a somatic mutation, as
          Code:
          0 100 100 0
          would be...
          Am I wrong?

          Comment

          • LiLin
            Member
            • May 2011
            • 15

            #6
            Originally posted by dkoboldt View Post
            Hello LiLin,

            There are a few criteria used to determine the somatic status of a variant. In your case, it seems most likely that --somatic-p-value was something lower than 0.47, so the variant did not meet the threshold to be called Somatic. Would you mind providing three things?
            1.) The VarScan version you're running
            2.) The command you used including all parameters
            3.) The normal and tumor pileup/mpileup for that chromosome position (it's fine if you alter the chromosome name or position; we need the depth, bases, and qualities).

            Jane, in your example, the variant is not called Somatic because the variant allele frequency is higher in normal (89%) than in tumor (43%).


            Thank you!
            Now I set --somatic-p-value 0.05,Then I find it.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • SEQadmin2
              Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
              by SEQadmin2


              I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

              Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
              06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
              by SEQadmin2


              Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


              The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
              ...
              06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
            0 responses
            36 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
            0 responses
            100 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
            0 responses
            120 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM
            0 responses
            113 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...