Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Smoothing window fraction fix results in noisier data in targeted sequencing panel? #859

Open
kkchau opened this issue Nov 30, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@kkchau
Copy link
Contributor

kkchau commented Nov 30, 2023

We're currently evaluating an update from version 0.9.9 to 0.9.10. However, we're seeing some increased noise among the ratios and resulting in an increased rate of false positives. Specifically, looking at the IQRs:

image

We've traced it back to this commit; I noticed that the window fraction now defaults to a limit of 0.01 (from the flat 0.1). Could this be under-correcting the log2 ratios during the fix step?

$ wc -l sample.target.coverage.cnn
43719 sample.target.coverage.cnn

$ wc -l sample.antitarget.coverage.cnn
3143 sample.antitarget.coverage.cnn

$ cnvkit.py fix --no-gc sample.target.coverage.cnn sample.antitarget.coverage.cnn sample.reference.cnn -o sample.cnr -i sample

I've opened up a PR to allow manual tuning of this parameter during the fix step: #860

@etal
Copy link
Owner

etal commented Dec 11, 2023

It could be under-correcting for GC and repeats overall. My aim in that commit was to improve performance on bins with extreme GC, where e.g. Picard showed there was still a correlation between GC content and coverage depth, by using a smaller window where there were enough data points. You have better benchmarking datasets on hand than I do at this point, so if you're seeing a deterioration, then I hope your PR gets you back to where you need to be.

I'm also curious if you find the original 10% was optimal or another window size is even better on today's data.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants