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

Investigate the viability of bcftools filter Maximum AF(tumor) < 1 #1166

Closed
mathiasbio opened this issue May 30, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed
Assignees
Labels
Request A request for new functionality

Comments

@mathiasbio
Copy link
Collaborator

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

In an inter-laboratory comparison (https://github.com/Clinical-Genomics/External-comparison/issues/22) there were 2 clearly somatic SNVs that were not detected in balsamic, or rather they were detected, but subsequently filtered out.

The likely cause of them not being present in the final VCF is that they had an allele-frequency of 1, and we have this bcftools filter in all our workflows --include 'FORMAT/AF[0] < 1.0' --soft-filter balsamic_af_one --mode + which translates to: if the variant has an allele-frequency below 1 it will not have this filter assigned to it, but all variants with an allele frequency >= 1 will have this filter and consequently be filtered out.

This wasn't very nice in this comparison, and it would have been good if the variants had not been filtered out.

Describe the solution you'd like

I don't know the reason behind why this filter was implemented.

  • Maybe it was intended to filter out strange variant-calls with an allele frequency above 1 and was wrongly implemented.
  • Maybe there are common artifacts in the variant calling with an AF of 1.

Either way, I don't think these variants are very common as the tumor is rarely this pure. But I can imagine, especially in WGS cases that this could occur by change in a very pure tumor sample too.

I think this filter needs to be investigated. And if this filter doesn't exist for a good reason (removing lots of false positive calls), it should probably be removed, and if the issue was that it's intended to remove variants with an illegal AF above 1, then it could maybe be corrected to something like:
--exclude 'FORMAT/AF[0] > 1.0' --soft-filter balsamic_af_one --mode +

Describe alternatives you've considered
If possible, a clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

Additional context
If possible, add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

Expected output for the feature
If possible, an example of expected output

Current BALSAMIC version
balsamic --version 12.0.0

@mathiasbio
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closed #1338

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Completed in BALSAMIC Jan 12, 2024
@ivadym ivadym moved this from Completed to Archived in BALSAMIC Jan 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Request A request for new functionality
Projects
Status: Archived
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant