Genome Analysis Toolkit

Variant Discovery in High-Throughput Sequencing Data

GATK process banner

Need Help?

Search our documentation

Community Forum

Hi, How can we help?

Developed in the Data Sciences Platform at the Broad Institute, the toolkit offers a wide variety of tools with a primary focus on variant discovery and genotyping. Its powerful processing engine and high-performance computing features make it capable of taking on projects of any size. Learn more

Mutect2 missing a low AF known deletion

0

4 comments

  • Avatar
    Genevieve Brandt (she/her)

    Hi Ying,

    Thank you for writing into the forum! I hope that we can help you figure this issue out. 

    The first thing I wanted to note is that the bamout will only show reads if there is an active region at that site. So, if there is nothing in the bamout, it means that there is no active region detected. Tumor-only calling is quite challenging in terms of getting high quality results, especially when looking for a variant with a low AF of 0.03. This could easily be deemed below the germline filtering threshold. 

    There's some follow up information I need in order to better understand what is happening at this site:

    1. Try force calling this site with the --alleles option in Mutect2 and please paste the VCF output.
    2. In your IGV screenshot, please highlight the site of interest and click on the site so that I can easily see the depth of each allele.

    Best,

    Genevieve

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    yingchen69

    Hi Genevieve,

    Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I ran the tests with the site chr17:7577542 added to the force calling site list and all test runs called the 9 base deletion with AF 0.025 no matter what options I set for --linked-de-bruijn-graph true / --recover-all-dangling-branches true / --min-pruning 0.

    Here is the copy from one vcf:

    chr17 7577542 . TCATGCCGCC T . . AS_SB_TABLE=10519,11258|256,292;DP=22325;ECNT=1;MBQ=20,20;MFRL=225,225;MMQ=60,60;MPOS=19;POPAF=5.60;TLOD=1346.38 GT:AD:AF:DP:F1R2:F2R1:FAD:SB 0/1:21777,548:0.025:22325:21604,542:0,0:21777,548:10519,11258,256,292

    Here is the IGV screenshot:

    The top is the original BQSRed bam, the second is original Mutect2 output bam. The bottom two are from two test runs with chr17:7577542 added to the force calling site list.

    What's the best practice to handle such scenario? Every time we miss a known mutation, we just add the site to the force calling list?  

    Thanks a lot for the help!

     

    Ying

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Genevieve Brandt (she/her)

    Thanks Ying! This is very helpful. Does this site pass filtering with FilterMutectCalls when you force call the site?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    yingchen69

    Hi Genevieve,

    Actually it passed the filtering which is a surprise to me.

    chr17 7577542 . TCATGCCGCC T . PASS AS_FilterStatus=SITE;AS_SB_TABLE=10519,11258|256,292;DP=22325;ECNT=1;GERMQ=93;MBQ=20,20;MFRL=225,225;MMQ=60,60;MPOS=19;POPAF=5.6;ROQ=93;TLOD=1346.38;ANN=T|conservative_inframe_deletion|MODERATE|TP53|TP53|transcript|NM_000546.5|protein_coding|7/11|NM_000546.5:c.730_738delGGCGGCATG|NM_000546.5:p.G244_M246del|940/2591|730/1182|244/393||;GE_AC=.;GE_AF=.;GE_AN=.;GG_AC=.;GG_AF=.;GG_AN=.;CLNDISDB=MedGen:C0085390,Orphanet:ORPHA524,SNOMED_CT:428850001;CLNDISDBINCL=.;CLNDN=Li-Fraumeni_syndrome;CLNDNINCL=.;CLNHGVS=NC_000017.10:g.7577548_7577556del;CLNREVSTAT=criteria_provided,_single_submitter;CLNSIG=Uncertain_significance;CLNSIGCONF=.;CLNSIGINCL=.;CLNVC=Deletion;CLNVCSO=SO:0000159;CLNVI=.;GENEINFO=TP53:7157;CLINVAR GT:AD:AF:DP:F1R2:F2R1:FAD:SB 0/1:21777,548:0.025:22325:21604,542:0,0:21777,548:10519,11258,256,292

    Thanks,

    Ying

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk