Fast lightweight accurate xenograft sorting

Motivation With an increasing number of patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models being created and subsequently sequenced to study tumor heterogeneity and to guide therapy decisions, there is a similarly increasing need for methods to separate reads originating from the graft (human) tumor and reads originating from the host species’ (mouse) surrounding tissue. Two kinds of methods are in use: On the one hand, alignment-based tools require that reads are mapped and aligned (by an external mapper/aligner) to the host and graft genomes separately first; the tool itself then processes the resulting alignments and quality metrics (typically BAM files) to assign each read or read pair. On the other hand, alignment-free tools work directly on the raw read data (typically FASTQ files). Recent studies compare different approaches and tools, with varying results. Results We show that alignment-free methods for xenograft sorting are superior concerning CPU time usage and equivalent in accuracy. We improve upon the state of the art sorting by presenting a fast lightweight approach based on three-way bucketed quotiented Cuckoo hashing. Our hash table requires memory comparable to an FM index typically used for read alignment and less than other alignment-free approaches. It allows extremely fast lookups and uses less CPU time than other alignment-free methods and alignment-based methods at similar accuracy. Availability Our software xengsort is available under the MIT license at http://gitlab.com/genomeinformatics/xengsort. It is written in numba-compiled Python and comes with Snakemake workflows for hash table construction and dataset processing. Contact Sven.Rahmann@uni-due.de

[1]  Sven Rahmann,et al.  Cost-optimal assignment of elements in genome-scale multi-way bucketed Cuckoo hash tables , 2020, ALENEX.

[2]  Ning Ma,et al.  BLAST+: architecture and applications , 2009, BMC Bioinformatics.

[3]  Marek Dynowski,et al.  Next-Generation Sequencing Analysis and Algorithms for PDX and CDX Models , 2017, Molecular Cancer Research.

[4]  Daniel S. Standage,et al.  Kevlar: a mapping-free framework for accurate discovery of de novo variants , 2019 .

[5]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[6]  Sangwoo Kim,et al.  Impact of mouse contamination in genomic profiling of patient-derived models and best practice for robust analysis , 2019, Genome Biology.

[7]  Wentao Dai,et al.  A comparison of next-generation sequencing analysis methods for cancer xenograft samples. , 2018, Journal of genetics and genomics = Yi chuan xue bao.

[8]  David J. Adams,et al.  XenofilteR: computational deconvolution of mouse and human reads in tumor xenograft sequence data , 2018, BMC Bioinformatics.

[9]  Lior Pachter,et al.  Near-optimal probabilistic RNA-seq quantification , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[10]  M. Eldridge,et al.  Disambiguate: An open-source application for disambiguating two species in next generation sequencing data from grafted , 2018 .

[11]  Siu Kwan Lam,et al.  Numba: a LLVM-based Python JIT compiler , 2015, LLVM '15.

[12]  Stefan Walzer Load Thresholds for Cuckoo Hashing with Overlapping Blocks , 2018, ICALP.

[13]  Jeremy Wazny,et al.  Xenome—a tool for classifying reads from xenograft samples , 2012, Bioinform..

[14]  Harry W. Clifford,et al.  Computational approach to discriminate human and mouse sequences in patient-derived tumour xenografts , 2018, BMC Genomics.

[15]  Marcel Martin Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads , 2011 .

[16]  W. J. Kent,et al.  BLAT--the BLAST-like alignment tool. , 2002, Genome research.