AccScience Publishing / TD / Volume 2 / Issue 2 / DOI: 10.36922/td.0894
Submit to TD
Cite this article
206
Download
1293
Views
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
PERSPECTIVE ARTICLE

Structural variants integration and visualization: A comprehensive R package for integration of somatic structural variations from multiple callers and visualization

Lei Yu1,2†* ,  Le Zhang2† ,  Lili Wang3 ,  Zhenyu Jia1,2*
Show Less
1 Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California, USA
2 Graduate Program in Genetics, Genomics, and Bioinformatics, University of California, Riverside, California, USA
3 Department of Systems Biology, Beckman Research Institute, Monrovia, California, USA
Tumor Discovery 2023, 2(2), 0894 https://doi.org/10.36922/td.0894
Submitted: 4 May 2023 | Accepted: 3 July 2023 | Published: 20 July 2023
© 2023 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Download PDF
Cite
XML
Abstract

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) emerges as a powerful tool for detecting structural variations (SVs) in genomes. However, different SV callers can produce variable results due to the distinct rationale and sensitivity of pipelines, highlighting the need for effective tools to compare and merge results from multiple callers. Here, we developed an R package, structural variants integration and visualization, to facilitate the integration, classification, and visualization of SV results from multiple callers, allowing for accurate identification of the most reliable SVs. Our package relies on a complex translocation projection and clustering method, enabling the projection of each translation to a point in a Cartesian coordinate system and visualization of SVs at both whole-genome and individual chromosome levels. Thus, our approach provides a valuable framework for analyzing SVs from WGS data, improving the accuracy and efficiency of SV detection, and enhancing the potential of WGS for clinical and research applications.

Keywords
Structure variation manipulation
Structure variation visualization
Structure variation analysis
Funding
None.
References
  1. Ho SS, Urban AE, Mills RE, 2020, Structural variation in the sequencing era. Nat Rev Genet, 21: 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-019-0180-9

 

  1. Van Belzen IA, Schönhuth A, Kemmeren P, et al., 2021, Structural variant detection in cancer genomes: Computational challenges and perspectives for precision oncology. NPJ Precis Oncol, 5: 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-021-00155-6

 

  1. Li Y, Roberts ND, Wala JA, et al., 2020, Patterns of somatic structural variation in human cancer genomes. Nature, 578: 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1913-9

 

  1. Ayatollahi H, Keramati MR, Kooshyar MM, et al., 2018, BCR-ABL fusion genes and laboratory findings in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in Northeast Iran. Caspian J Intern Med, 9: 65–70. https://doi.org/10.22088/cjim.9.1.65

 

  1. Ross TS, Mgbemena VE, 2014, Re-evaluating the role of BCR/ABL in chronic myelogenous leukemia. Mol Cell Oncol, 1: e963450. https://doi.org/10.4161/23723548.2014.963450

 

  1. Gajria D, Chandarlapaty S, 2011, HER2-amplified breast cancer: Mechanisms of trastuzumab resistance and novel targeted therapies. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther, 11: 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1586/era.10.226

 

  1. Foulkes WD, Flanders TY, Pollock PM, et al., 1997, The CDKN2A (p16) gene and human cancer. Mol Med, 3: 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03401664

 

  1. Chen X, Schulz-Trieglaff O, Shaw R, et al., 2016, Manta: Rapid detection of structural variants and indels for germline and cancer sequencing applications. Bioinformatics, 32: 1220–1222. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btv710

 

  1. Rausch T, Zichner T, Schlattl A, et al., 2012, DELLY: Structural variant discovery by integrated paired-end and split-read analysis. Bioinformatics, 28: i333–i339. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts378

 

  1. Layer RM, Chiang C, Quinlan AR, et al., 2014, LUMPY: A probabilistic framework for structural variant discovery. Genome Biol, 15: R84. 10.1186/gb-2014-15-6-r84

 

  1. Cameron DL, Schröder J, Penington JS, et al., 2017, GRIDSS: Sensitive and specific genomic rearrangement detection using positional de Bruijn graph assembly. Genome Res, 27: 2050–2060. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.222109.117

 

  1. Cameron DL, Baber J, Shale C, et al., 2021, GRIDSS2: Comprehensive characterisation of somatic structural variation using single breakend variants and structural variant phasing. Genome Biol, 22: 202. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-021-02423-x

 

  1. Cameron DL, Di Stefano L, Papenfuss AT, 2019, Comprehensive evaluation and characterisation of short read general-purpose structural variant calling software. Nat Commun, 10: 3240. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11146-4

 

  1. Zhang CZ, Spektor A, Cornils H, et al., 2015, Chromothripsis from DNA damage in micronuclei. Nature, 522: 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14493

 

  1. Kassambara, A., 2016. Factoextra: Extract And Visualize The Results Of Multivariate Data Analyses. R Package Version, 1. Available from: https://cran.rproject.org/ web/packages/factoextra/index.html [Last accessed on 2023 Jul 19].

 

  1. Wickham H, 2011, ggplot2. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat, 3: 180–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.147

 

  1. Gel B, Serra E, 2017, Karyoploter: An R/Bioconductor package to plot customizable genomes displaying arbitrary data. Bioinformatics, 33: 3088–3090. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btx346
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Share
Back to top
Tumor Discovery, Electronic ISSN: 2810-9775 Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept