2013
DOI: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-10-r120
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

EXCAVATOR: detecting copy number variants from whole-exome sequencing data

Abstract: We developed a novel software tool, EXCAVATOR, for the detection of copy number variants (CNVs) from whole-exome sequencing data. EXCAVATOR combines a three-step normalization procedure with a novel heterogeneous hidden Markov model algorithm and a calling method that classifies genomic regions into five copy number states. We validate EXCAVATOR on three datasets and compare the results with three other methods. These analyses show that EXCAVATOR outperforms the other methods and is therefore a valuable tool f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
212
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 217 publications
(214 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
2
212
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, we selected "strong candidate variants" among the possible causal variants in the case that the variants resided in the already-known deafness genes, the public database strongly supported their pathogenicity, or both. To assess the pathogenicity of possible candidates, we calculated a pathogenicity score 16 by summing the SIFT (http://sift. jcvi.org/), PolyPhen2 (http://genetics.bwh.harvard.edu/ pph2/), likelihood ratio test (http://www.molecularevolution.org/resources/lrt), MutationTaster (http://www.mutationtaster.org/), and GERP++ (http://mendel.stanford.edu/ SidowLab/downloads/gerp/) scores to predict deleterious variants.…”
Section: Original Research Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Finally, we selected "strong candidate variants" among the possible causal variants in the case that the variants resided in the already-known deafness genes, the public database strongly supported their pathogenicity, or both. To assess the pathogenicity of possible candidates, we calculated a pathogenicity score 16 by summing the SIFT (http://sift. jcvi.org/), PolyPhen2 (http://genetics.bwh.harvard.edu/ pph2/), likelihood ratio test (http://www.molecularevolution.org/resources/lrt), MutationTaster (http://www.mutationtaster.org/), and GERP++ (http://mendel.stanford.edu/ SidowLab/downloads/gerp/) scores to predict deleterious variants.…”
Section: Original Research Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Excavator version 2.2 16 was used to call CNVs to minimize any systematic biases, such as guanine-cytosine (GC) content, mappability, and exon length. 16 …”
Section: Copy-number Variant Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many, such as XHMM 13 and EXCAVATOR, 14 use hidden Markov model approaches, whereas others such as CoNIFER 15 use single-value decomposition. CoNIFER, interestingly, offers the ability to group multiple runs of a single sample together to help reduce batch effects, which we believe are a significant source of noise in our own data set.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Somatic sequence variants were identified using the SAVI algorithm (19). Somatic CNVs were identified from the depth of coverage using EXCAVATOR (44). Wholegenome sequencing libraries were prepared using the Illumina TruSeq Nano DNA Sample Prep Kit, and sequencing was performed on Illumina HiSeq X Ten instrument (Illumina).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%