I use Mutect to find somatic mutations in multiple tumor samples (to be used in clonality analysis). I don't get the readcounts if the caller did not identify a somatic mutation in a sample. I'm using bam-readcount to fill in the empty values after merging Mutect results from different samples. Where I have values from both tools, the readcounts are lower in the Mutect results. Is there a way to use bam-readcount in a way to substitute for missing Mutect values?
•
written
by
sey •
1 answer
Many callers do some filtering of reads first (by base quality, by mapping quality, maybe even local realignment) and report only counts from reads that pass. bam-readcount, by default, outputs "raw" counts. You may or may not be able to mimic those Mutect settings with bam-readcount parameters.
This problem is compounded when merging the output from different variant callers, and there is no "perfect" solution.
Log in to answer this question.
-
Mutect2 filtering log-odds (LOD) threshold
written by CY
-
identifying TP53 germline mutations which are also in tumor cells.
written by lait
-
Use of if-else statement in snakemake rule
written by Jokhe •
-
how to interprete the somatic mutations with low frequency in tumor sample compared with the normal…
written by Ontheway •
-
IGV for WES (Somatic Mutations)
written by haiying.kong
-
The problem with sensitivity analysis of somatic variant caller
written by phongphak.06 •
-
MuTect Seems to Miss a Lot of Mutations
written by haiying.kong
-
.bam file of human reference genome (hg19)
written by Max
-
Discrepancy with Mutect output version 1.1.4 using the --interval option for normal/tumor pair canc…
written by ivivek_ngs
-
analysis amplicon miseq
written by chenming_sunshine •
