检测微卫星不稳定性的计算工具的性能评估。

IF 6.8 2区 生物学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Briefings in bioinformatics Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1093/bib/bbae390
Harrison Anthony, Cathal Seoighe
{"title":"检测微卫星不稳定性的计算工具的性能评估。","authors":"Harrison Anthony, Cathal Seoighe","doi":"10.1093/bib/bbae390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a phenomenon seen in several cancer types, which can be used as a biomarker to help guide immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. To facilitate this, researchers have developed computational tools to categorize samples as having high microsatellite instability, or as being microsatellite stable using next-generation sequencing data. Most of these tools were published with unclear scope and usage, and they have yet to be independently benchmarked. To address these issues, we assessed the performance of eight leading MSI tools across several unique datasets that encompass a wide variety of sequencing methods. While we were able to replicate the original findings of each tool on whole exome sequencing data, most tools had worse receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall area under the curve values on whole genome sequencing data. We also found that they lacked agreement with one another and with commercial MSI software on gene panel data, and that optimal threshold cut-offs vary by sequencing type. Lastly, we tested tools made specifically for RNA sequencing data and found they were outperformed by tools designed for use with DNA sequencing data. Out of all, two tools (MSIsensor2, MANTIS) performed well across nearly all datasets, but when all datasets were combined, their precision decreased. Our results caution that MSI tools can have much lower performance on datasets other than those on which they were originally evaluated, and in the case of RNA sequencing tools, can even perform poorly on the type of data for which they were created.</p>","PeriodicalId":9209,"journal":{"name":"Briefings in bioinformatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317526/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance assessment of computational tools to detect microsatellite instability.\",\"authors\":\"Harrison Anthony, Cathal Seoighe\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bib/bbae390\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a phenomenon seen in several cancer types, which can be used as a biomarker to help guide immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. To facilitate this, researchers have developed computational tools to categorize samples as having high microsatellite instability, or as being microsatellite stable using next-generation sequencing data. Most of these tools were published with unclear scope and usage, and they have yet to be independently benchmarked. To address these issues, we assessed the performance of eight leading MSI tools across several unique datasets that encompass a wide variety of sequencing methods. While we were able to replicate the original findings of each tool on whole exome sequencing data, most tools had worse receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall area under the curve values on whole genome sequencing data. We also found that they lacked agreement with one another and with commercial MSI software on gene panel data, and that optimal threshold cut-offs vary by sequencing type. Lastly, we tested tools made specifically for RNA sequencing data and found they were outperformed by tools designed for use with DNA sequencing data. Out of all, two tools (MSIsensor2, MANTIS) performed well across nearly all datasets, but when all datasets were combined, their precision decreased. Our results caution that MSI tools can have much lower performance on datasets other than those on which they were originally evaluated, and in the case of RNA sequencing tools, can even perform poorly on the type of data for which they were created.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Briefings in bioinformatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317526/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Briefings in bioinformatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbae390\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Briefings in bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbae390","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

微卫星不稳定性(MSI)是几种癌症类型中都会出现的一种现象,它可以作为一种生物标记物来帮助指导免疫检查点抑制剂的治疗。为此,研究人员开发了一些计算工具,利用新一代测序数据将样本分为微卫星不稳定性高的样本和微卫星稳定的样本。这些工具中的大多数在发表时都没有明确的范围和用途,也没有经过独立的基准测试。为了解决这些问题,我们在包含多种测序方法的几个独特数据集上评估了八种主要 MSI 工具的性能。虽然我们能在全外显子组测序数据上复制每种工具的原始结果,但大多数工具在全基因组测序数据上的接收者操作特征值和精确度-召回曲线下面积值更差。我们还发现,在基因面板数据上,这些工具之间以及与商业 MSI 软件之间缺乏一致性,而且不同测序类型的最佳阈值临界值也不同。最后,我们测试了专为 RNA 测序数据设计的工具,发现它们的性能优于专为 DNA 测序数据设计的工具。在所有工具中,有两种工具(MSIsensor2、MANTIS)在几乎所有数据集上都表现出色,但当所有数据集合并时,它们的精确度下降了。我们的研究结果提醒我们,MSI 工具在其他数据集上的表现可能比最初评估它们的数据集要差得多,就 RNA 测序工具而言,它们甚至可能在创建时所针对的数据类型上表现不佳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Performance assessment of computational tools to detect microsatellite instability.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a phenomenon seen in several cancer types, which can be used as a biomarker to help guide immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. To facilitate this, researchers have developed computational tools to categorize samples as having high microsatellite instability, or as being microsatellite stable using next-generation sequencing data. Most of these tools were published with unclear scope and usage, and they have yet to be independently benchmarked. To address these issues, we assessed the performance of eight leading MSI tools across several unique datasets that encompass a wide variety of sequencing methods. While we were able to replicate the original findings of each tool on whole exome sequencing data, most tools had worse receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall area under the curve values on whole genome sequencing data. We also found that they lacked agreement with one another and with commercial MSI software on gene panel data, and that optimal threshold cut-offs vary by sequencing type. Lastly, we tested tools made specifically for RNA sequencing data and found they were outperformed by tools designed for use with DNA sequencing data. Out of all, two tools (MSIsensor2, MANTIS) performed well across nearly all datasets, but when all datasets were combined, their precision decreased. Our results caution that MSI tools can have much lower performance on datasets other than those on which they were originally evaluated, and in the case of RNA sequencing tools, can even perform poorly on the type of data for which they were created.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Briefings in bioinformatics
Briefings in bioinformatics 生物-生化研究方法
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
13.70%
发文量
549
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Briefings in Bioinformatics is an international journal serving as a platform for researchers and educators in the life sciences. It also appeals to mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientists applying their expertise to biological challenges. The journal focuses on reviews tailored for users of databases and analytical tools in contemporary genetics, molecular and systems biology. It stands out by offering practical assistance and guidance to non-specialists in computerized methodologies. Covering a wide range from introductory concepts to specific protocols and analyses, the papers address bacterial, plant, fungal, animal, and human data. The journal's detailed subject areas include genetic studies of phenotypes and genotypes, mapping, DNA sequencing, expression profiling, gene expression studies, microarrays, alignment methods, protein profiles and HMMs, lipids, metabolic and signaling pathways, structure determination and function prediction, phylogenetic studies, and education and training.
期刊最新文献
TUnA: an uncertainty-aware transformer model for sequence-based protein-protein interaction prediction. scLEGA: an attention-based deep clustering method with a tendency for low expression of genes on single-cell RNA-seq data. CatLearning: highly accurate gene expression prediction from histone mark. Detecting novel cell type in single-cell chromatin accessibility data via open-set domain adaptation. Explorer: efficient DNA coding by De Bruijn graph toward arbitrary local and global biochemical constraints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1