Analysis pipelines for cancer genome sequencing in mice

Mouse models of human cancer have transformed our ability to link genetics, molecular mechanisms and phenotypes. Both reverse and forward genetics in mice are currently gaining momentum through advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS). Methodologies to analyze sequencing data were, however, developed for humans and hence do not account for species-specific differences in genome structures and experimental setups. Here, we describe standardized computational pipelines specifically tailored to the analysis of mouse genomic data. We present novel tools and workflows for the detection of different alteration types, including single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions and deletions (indels), copy-number variations (CNVs), loss of heterozygosity (LOH) and complex rearrangements, such as in chromothripsis. Workflows have been extensively validated and cross-compared using multiple methodologies. We also give step-by-step guidance on the execution of individual analysis types, provide advice on data interpretation and make the complete code available online. The protocol takes 2–7 d, depending on the desired analyses. Here, the authors present standardized computational pipelines tailored specifically to the analysis of cancer genome sequencing data from mice. The protocol enables detection of single-nucleotide variants, indels, copy-number variations, loss of heterozygosity and complex rearrangements such as those of chromothripsis.

[1]  L. Fiette,et al.  Histopathology procedures: from tissue sampling to histopathological evaluation. , 2011, Methods in molecular biology.

[2]  A. Bradley,et al.  Tools for targeted manipulation of the mouse genome. , 2002, Physiological genomics.

[3]  Jos Jonkers,et al.  CopywriteR: DNA copy number detection from off-target sequence data , 2015, Genome Biology.

[4]  D. Lambrechts,et al.  Genomic landscape of carcinogen-induced and genetically induced mouse skin squamous cell carcinoma , 2015, Nature Medicine.

[5]  Matthew B. Callaway,et al.  MuSiC: Identifying mutational significance in cancer genomes , 2012, Genome research.

[6]  A. Yoshiki,et al.  Strain specific sensitivity to diethylnitrosamine-induced carcinogenesis is maintained in hepatocytes of C3H/HeN⇔C57BL/6N chimeric mice , 1991 .

[7]  Thomas Zichner,et al.  DELLY: structural variant discovery by integrated paired-end and split-read analysis , 2012, Bioinform..

[8]  Christopher A. Miller,et al.  VarScan 2: somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. , 2012, Genome research.

[9]  V. Jobanputra,et al.  Deep sequencing of 3 cancer cell lines on 2 sequencing platforms , 2019, bioRxiv.

[10]  Paolo Piazza,et al.  Comprehensive comparison of Pacific Biosciences and Oxford Nanopore Technologies and their applications to transcriptome analysis , 2017, F1000Research.

[11]  James Y. Zou.  Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans , 2015, Nature.

[12]  M. Hurles,et al.  The genome-wide effects of ionizing radiation on mutation induction in the mammalian germline , 2015, Nature Communications.

[13]  A. Balmain,et al.  Carcinogen-specific mutation and amplification of Ha-ras during mouse skin carcinogenesis , 1986, Nature.

[14]  Julian Gehring,et al.  SomaticSignatures: inferring mutational signatures from single-nucleotide variants , 2014, bioRxiv.

[15]  Lei Zhang,et al.  Differences between germline and somatic mutation rates in humans and mice , 2017, Nature Communications.

[16]  A. Bashashati,et al.  Integrative analysis of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity and monoallelic expression at nucleotide resolution reveals disrupted pathways in triple-negative breast cancer , 2012, Genome research.

[17]  A. McKenna,et al.  Genetic and Clonal Dissection of Murine Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Progression by Genome Sequencing , 2014, Cell.

[18]  H. Morse.  Origins of inbred mice. , 1978 .

[19]  Michael B. Stadler,et al.  PIK3CAH1047R induces multipotency and multi-lineage mammary tumours , 2015, Nature.

[20]  E. Kirkness,et al.  Comparison of phasing strategies for whole human genomes , 2018, PLoS genetics.

[21]  Trevor J Pugh,et al.  Discovery and characterization of artifactual mutations in deep coverage targeted capture sequencing data due to oxidative DNA damage during sample preparation , 2013, Nucleic acids research.

[22]  Yongwook Choi,et al.  PROVEAN web server: a tool to predict the functional effect of amino acid substitutions and indels , 2015, Bioinform..

[23]  Christopher T. Saunders,et al.  Strelka2: fast and accurate calling of germline and somatic variants , 2018, Nature Methods.

[24]  International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium.  Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome , 2001, Nature.

[25]  Mathias J Friedrich,et al.  Evolutionary routes and KRAS dosage define pancreatic cancer phenotypes , 2018, Nature.

[26]  Colin N. Dewey,et al.  Initial sequencing and comparative analysis of the mouse genome. , 2002 .

[27]  N. Carter,et al.  Massive Genomic Rearrangement Acquired in a Single Catastrophic Event during Cancer Development , 2011, Cell.

[28]  Ira M. Hall,et al.  Recurrent DNA copy number variation in the laboratory mouse , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[29]  A. Ashworth,et al.  Whole‐exome DNA sequence analysis of Brca2‐ and Trp53‐deficient mouse mammary gland tumours , 2015, The Journal of pathology.

[30]  R. Guigó,et al.  Comparative transcriptomics in human and mouse , 2017, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[31]  Eric Talevich,et al.  CNVkit: Genome-Wide Copy Number Detection and Visualization from Targeted DNA Sequencing , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[32]  E. Eichler,et al.  Mouse segmental duplication and copy number variation , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[33]  Defective DNA damage repair leads to frequent catastrophic genomic events in murine and human tumors , 2018, Nature Communications.

[34]  G. -. Lee,et al.  Strain specific sensitivity to diethylnitrosamine-induced carcinogenesis is maintained in hepatocytes of C3H/HeN in equilibrium with C57BL/6N chimeric mice. , 1991, Cancer research.

[35]  Michael A. Choti,et al.  Whole-exome sequencing of pancreatic cancer defines genetic diversity and therapeutic targets , 2015, Nature Communications.

[36]  Tim F. Rayner,et al.  Mutational landscape of a chemically-induced mouse model of liver cancer , 2018, bioRxiv.

[37]  Christopher W Murray,et al.  Towards quantitative and multiplexed in vivo functional cancer genomics , 2018, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[38]  Adam P. Rosebrock,et al.  Mutational landscape of EGFR-, MYC-, and Kras-driven genetically engineered mouse models of lung adenocarcinoma , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  Tingting Jiang,et al.  Reliability of Whole-Exome Sequencing for Assessing Intratumor Genetic Heterogeneity , 2018, bioRxiv.

[40]  Thomas M. Keane,et al.  The mutational landscapes of genetic and chemical models of Kras-driven lung cancer , 2014, Nature.

[41]  Stacey Price,et al.  A Genetic Progression Model of BrafV600E-Induced Intestinal Tumorigenesis Reveals Targets for Therapeutic Intervention , 2013, Cancer cell.

[42]  Mathias J Friedrich,et al.  Genome-wide transposon screening and quantitative insertion site sequencing for cancer gene discovery in mice , 2017, Nature Protocols.

[43]  Marshall W. Anderson,et al.  Activation of the Ki-ras protooncogene in spontaneously occurring and chemically induced lung tumors of the strain A mouse. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  J. Guillen.  FELASA guidelines and recommendations. , 2012, Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS.

[45]  S. Wakana,et al.  Germline mutation rates and the long-term phenotypic effects of mutation accumulation in wild-type laboratory mice and mutator mice , 2015, Genome research.

[46]  Misko Dzamba,et al.  Detecting copy number variation with mated short reads. , 2010, Genome research.

[47]  R. Cardiff,et al.  Genetic background affects susceptibility to mammary hyperplasias and carcinomas in Apc(min)/+ mice. , 2001, Cancer research.

[48]  G. Gores,et al.  Induction of intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma by liver-specific disruption of Smad4 and Pten in mice. , 2006, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[49]  Karlyne M. Reilly,et al.  Nf1;Trp53 mutant mice develop glioblastoma with evidence of strain-specific effects , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[50]  F. Gnad,et al.  Kras mutant genetically engineered mouse models of human cancers are genomically heterogeneous , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[51]  G. Getz,et al.  GISTIC2.0 facilitates sensitive and confident localization of the targets of focal somatic copy-number alteration in human cancers , 2011, Genome Biology.

[52]  L. Wessels,et al.  Mouse models in the era of large human tumour sequencing studies , 2018, Open Biology.

[53]  A. Sivachenko,et al.  Sensitive detection of somatic point mutations in impure and heterogeneous cancer samples , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[54]  R. Rad,et al.  Engineering CRISPR mouse models of cancer. , 2019, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[55]  A. Berns,et al.  Conditional mouse models of sporadic cancer , 2002, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[56]  R. Maronpot,et al.  Mutations in the ras proto-oncogene: clues to etiology and molecular pathogenesis of mouse liver tumors. , 1995, Toxicology.

[57]  A. Balmain,et al.  Evolution of metastasis revealed by mutational landscapes of chemically induced skin cancers , 2015, Nature Medicine.

[58]  Y. Sasaki,et al.  Assessment of the quality of DNA from various formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues and the use of this DNA for next-generation sequencing (NGS) with no artifactual mutation , 2017, PloS one.

[59]  Kai Ye,et al.  Pindel: a pattern growth approach to detect break points of large deletions and medium sized insertions from paired-end short reads , 2009, Bioinform..

[60]  Mauricio O. Carneiro,et al.  Scaling accurate genetic variant discovery to tens of thousands of samples , 2017, bioRxiv.

[61]  Thomas M. Keane,et al.  Mouse genomic variation and its effect on phenotypes and gene regulation , 2011, Nature.

[62]  J. Korbel,et al.  Criteria for Inference of Chromothripsis in Cancer Genomes , 2013, Cell.

[63]  B. Spencer‐Dene,et al.  Duct- and Acinar-Derived Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas Show Distinct Tumor Progression and Marker Expression , 2017, Cell reports.