Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Dataset . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Long-Read Structural and Epigenetic Profiling of a Kidney Tumor-Matched Sample with Nanopore Sequencing and Optical Genome Mapping

Authors: Sapir Margalit, Zuzana Tulpová, Tahir Detinis Zur, Yael Michaeli, Jasline Deek, Gil Nifker, Rita Haldar, Yehudit Gnatek, Dorit Omer, Benjamin Dekel, Hagit Baris Feldman, Assaf Grunwald, and Yuval Ebenstein;

Long-Read Structural and Epigenetic Profiling of a Kidney Tumor-Matched Sample with Nanopore Sequencing and Optical Genome Mapping

Abstract

Carcinogenesis often involves significant alterations in the cancer genome, marked by large structural and copy number variations (SVs and CNVs) that are difficult to capture with short-read sequencing. Traditionally, cytogenetic techniques are applied to detect such aberrations, but they are limited in resolution and do not cover features smaller than several hundred kilobases. Optical genome mapping (OGM) and nanopore sequencing (ONT) bridge this resolution gap and offer enhanced performance for cytogenetic applications. Additionally, both methods can capture epigenetic information as they profile native, individual DNA molecules. We compared the effectiveness of the two methods in characterizing the structural, copy number and epigenetic landscape of a clear cell renal cell carcinoma tumor. Both methods provided comparable results for basic karyotyping and CNVs, but differed in their ability to detect SVs of different sizes and types. ONT outperformed OGM in detecting small SVs, while OGM excelled in detecting larger SVs, including translocations. Differences were also observed among various ONT SV callers. Additionally, both methods provided insights into the tumor's methylome and hydroxymethylome. While ONT was superior in methylation calling, hydroxymethylation reports can be further optimized. Our findings underscore the importance of carefully selecting the most appropriate platform based on specific research questions. OGM and ONT data of a ccRCC tumor and a normal adjacent tissue. Files include: Optical Genome Mapping (OGM) files: a. 5hmC: 5hmC_normal_alignemnt.rar (.xmap, _q.cmap, _r.cmap) 5hmC_tumor_alignment.rar (.xmap, _q.cmap, _r.cmap) 5hmC_normal_min.cov20_normalized.bedgraph 5hmC_tumor_min.cov20_normalized.bedgraph b. reduced representation optical methylation mapping (ROM with MtaqI): normal_Mtaq_alignment.rar (.xmap, _q.cmap, _r.cmap) tumor_Mtaq_alignment.rar (.xmap, _q.cmap, _r.cmap) normal_Mtaq_min.cov20_normalized.bedgraph tumor_Mtaq_min.cov20_normalized.bedgraph c. SVs: normal_variants_combine_filters_inMoleRefine1.smap tumor_variants_combine_filters_inMoleRefine1.smap 2. Oxford nanopore sequencing (ONT) files: a. ONT bedmethyl (modkit outputs): ONT_modkit_5hmC_normal.bed ONT_modkit_5hmC_tumor.bed ONT_modkit_5mC_normal.bed ONT_modkit_5mC_tumor.bed b. SVs: normal_ONT_EPI2ME_SV.vcf tumor_ONT_EPI2ME_SV.vcf

Keywords

Nanopore Sequencing, optical genome mapping, long reads, ccRCC

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research