Heads up:
We’re moving the GATK website, docs and forum to a new platform. Read the full story and breakdown of key changes on this blog.
Notice:
If you happen to see a question you know the answer to, please do chime in and help your fellow community members. We encourage our fourm members to be more involved, jump in and help out your fellow researchers with their questions. GATK forum is a community forum and helping each other with using GATK tools and research is the cornerstone of our success as a genomics research community.We appreciate your help!

Test-drive the GATK tools and Best Practices pipelines on Terra


Check out this blog post to learn how you can get started with GATK and try out the pipelines in preconfigured workspaces (with a user-friendly interface!) without having to install anything.

VariantFiltration applied to mutect calls generates substantially different FA in some cases?

lintnerlintner Cambridge, MAMember, Broadie

Hi Folks,
I'm using Mutect to call somatic variants on some human gene panel data (~660 amplicons). After making the calls I applied VariantFiltration in order to limit the variants to a specific set of coordinates (via a bed file). VariantFiltration seems to have done the job in terms of selecting the correct regions; however, the FA can be quite different, but not always.

For example (HOT = VariantFiltration Applied): 3 samples
[sample name = c2; FA = c15]

HOT ras119 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 853 38 24 891 0.043 4.3
FULL ras119 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 584 290 28 878 0.332 33.20
HOT ras116 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 536 345 25 884 0.392 39.2
FULL ras116 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 447 405 27 854 0.475 47.50
HOT ras25 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 833 97 25 930 0.104 10.4
FULL ras25 12 25360224 rs61764370 A C KRAS 0/1 638 236 28 876 0.27 27.00

It isn't clear to me why this would change, nor is it clear which number I should believe.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
Robert

Answers

Sign In or Register to comment.