Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • CLFougner
    Junior Member
    • Mar 2016
    • 2

    Compare mouse cancer sequence data with COSMIC database

    I'm working with whole exome sequence data from a mouse breast cancer model. I've done mutation calling using the GATK best practices workflow (BWA mem (mm10) -> Picard deduplicate -> base quality score recalibration -> Mutect2. Annotated .vcfs with SnpEff). I now wanted to compare my variants to the COSMIC data base to see if the orthologous variants have been found in human, and am having trouble figuring out the most appropriate way to do this.

    My first thought was to convert my VCF files to .bed files and use the UCSC liftover tool to convert the files from m10 to hg19. I've however also found a publication in which they perform what I'm looking to do, and in their methods they write:

    Variants were compared to known human somatic mutations as available via the COSMIC database38. Briefly, the mouse and human sequences for homologous proteins were pairwise aligned using Clustal Omega39 and the human protein position homolo- gous to the mouse mutation was used to query COSMIC for known missense and nonsense mutations at or surrounding this peptide position. Local conservation was determined after sequence alignment using a 6 10 amino acid residue window surrounding the substituted amino acid.
    I've looked into Clustal Omega, but I'm having trouble understanding how to implement it into this sort of workflow.

    I'm wondering if anyone has done this sort of analysis, and what workflow you've had the most success with?

    Thanks!
  • tristan dubos
    Member
    • Dec 2015
    • 39

    #2
    Hi ,
    I looked the Clustal Omega and you can only compared homologous by pair ? and the think is how to automatize it ?

    Trist

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • GATTACAT
      Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
      by GATTACAT
      Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
      07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
    • SEQadmin2
      Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
      by SEQadmin2


      I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

      Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
      06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 11:05 AM
    0 responses
    6 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
    0 responses
    27 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
    0 responses
    25 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
    0 responses
    25 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...