2020
DOI: 10.1200/cci.19.00132
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Integrated Informatics Analysis of Cancer-Related Variants

Abstract: PURPOSE The modern researcher is confronted with hundreds of published methods to interpret genetic variants. There are databases of genes and variants, phenotype-genotype relationships, algorithms that score and rank genes, and in silico variant effect prediction tools. Because variant prioritization is a multifactorial problem, a welcome development in the field has been the emergence of decision support frameworks, which make it easier to integrate multiple resources in an interactive environment. Current d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
56
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Major structural variants (SVs) were inferred with Manta 0.27.1 [ 58 ]. The annotation and further filtering of Strelka quality-passed SNVs and indels were done based on two different platforms, i.e., OpenCravat [ 59 ] and Gemini-Seave pipeline [ 60 ]. Mutational signatures were determined for each specimen as per the method described by Mueller et al [ 18 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Major structural variants (SVs) were inferred with Manta 0.27.1 [ 58 ]. The annotation and further filtering of Strelka quality-passed SNVs and indels were done based on two different platforms, i.e., OpenCravat [ 59 ] and Gemini-Seave pipeline [ 60 ]. Mutational signatures were determined for each specimen as per the method described by Mueller et al [ 18 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To prioritize cancer-related genes in AA ESCC, we employed a combination of analyses in Opencravat 25 . We identified 23 missense and splice site mutations and 34 noncoding or synonymous variants previously described in ESCC in COSMIC database (Supplementary Table S4 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For CanDrA+, we used the default prediction categories [ 27 ]. Predictions for CHASMplus and CanDrA+ were obtained from the OpenCRAVAT web server [ 55 ] and executable packages published by Mao et al [ 27 ]. Two ensemble techniques were used to combine the outputs produced by different mutation effect predictors.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%