Show simple item record

dc.creatorMiura, S
dc.creatorVu, T
dc.creatorDeng, J
dc.creatorButurla, T
dc.creatorOladeinde, O
dc.creatorChoi, J
dc.creatorKumar, S
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-10T16:58:42Z
dc.date.available2020-12-10T16:58:42Z
dc.date.issued2020-12-01
dc.identifier.issn2045-2322
dc.identifier.issn2045-2322
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/4249
dc.identifier.other32103044 (pubmed)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/4267
dc.description.abstract© 2020, The Author(s). Tumors harbor extensive genetic heterogeneity in the form of distinct clone genotypes that arise over time and across different tissues and regions in cancer. Many computational methods produce clone phylogenies from population bulk sequencing data collected from multiple tumor samples from a patient. These clone phylogenies are used to infer mutation order and clone origins during tumor progression, rendering the selection of the appropriate clonal deconvolution method critical. Surprisingly, absolute and relative accuracies of these methods in correctly inferring clone phylogenies are yet to consistently assessed. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of seven computational methods. The accuracy of the reconstructed mutation order and inferred clone groupings varied extensively among methods. All the tested methods showed limited ability to identify ancestral clone sequences present in tumor samples correctly. The presence of copy number alterations, the occurrence of multiple seeding events among tumor sites during metastatic tumor evolution, and extensive intermixture of cancer cells among tumors hindered the detection of clones and the inference of clone phylogenies for all methods tested. Overall, CloneFinder, MACHINA, and LICHeE showed the highest overall accuracy, but none of the methods performed well for all simulated datasets. So, we present guidelines for selecting methods for data analysis.
dc.format.extent3498-
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.haspartScientific Reports
dc.relation.isreferencedbySpringer Science and Business Media LLC
dc.rightsCC BY
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectComputational Biology
dc.subjectDatabases, Genetic
dc.subjectGenetic Heterogeneity
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectNeoplasms
dc.subjectPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide
dc.titlePower and pitfalls of computational methods for inferring clone phylogenies and mutation orders from bulk sequencing data
dc.typeArticle
dc.type.genreJournal Article
dc.relation.doi10.1038/s41598-020-59006-2
dc.ada.noteFor Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
dc.creator.orcidKumar, Sudhir|0000-0002-9918-8212
dc.date.updated2020-12-10T16:58:37Z
refterms.dateFOA2020-12-10T16:58:42Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Power and pitfalls of computational ...
Size:
6.804Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

CC BY
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as CC BY