2012
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strelka: accurate somatic small-variant calling from sequenced tumor–normal sample pairs

Abstract: csaunders@illumina.com

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
1,158
0
4

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,437 publications
(1,163 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
1,158
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Duplicate reads were removed with Picard based on identical paired endpoints (Broad Institute). Variants were called using three programs: MuTect (SNPs),13 SomaticSniper (SNPs),14 and Strelka (INDELs) 15. Variants were annotated using AnnoVar for functional changes (nonsynonymous mutations) to RefSeq gene annotation 16.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Duplicate reads were removed with Picard based on identical paired endpoints (Broad Institute). Variants were called using three programs: MuTect (SNPs),13 SomaticSniper (SNPs),14 and Strelka (INDELs) 15. Variants were annotated using AnnoVar for functional changes (nonsynonymous mutations) to RefSeq gene annotation 16.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Local realignments and base‐quality recalibrations were conducted using Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK) 17, 18. Somatic single‐nucleotide variants (SNVs) and short insertions and deletions (indels) were called using Strelka 19. Functional annotation of the identified somatic variants was implemented by ANNOVAR 20…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reads were aligned to the human reference genome (hg19) using the BurrowsWheeler Aligner (BWA), 22 followed by realignment and recalibration of the initial alignment using the Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK). 23 Somatic variants were detected using VarScan2 24 and Strelka 25 (additional details in supplemental Methods). The detected variants by either tool were pooled for follow-up analysis.…”
Section: Wgs Exome and Sanger Sequencing/analysismentioning
confidence: 99%