A common methodological phylogenomics framework for intra-patient heteroplasmies to infer SARS-CoV-2 sublineages and tumor clones

  1. Filippo Utro
  2. Chaya Levovitz
  3. Kahn Rhrissorrakrai
  4. Laxmi Parida

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

All diseases containing genetic material undergo genetic evolution and give rise to heterogeneity including cancer and infection. Although these illnesses are biologically very different, the ability for phylogenetic retrodiction based on the genomic reads is common between them and thus tree-based principles and assumptions are shared. Just as the different frequencies of tumor genomic variants presupposes the existence of multiple tumor clones and provides a handle to computationally infer them, we postulate that the different variant frequencies in viral reads offers the means to infer multiple co-infecting sublineages.

Results

We present a common methodological framework to infer the phylogenomics from genomic data, be it reads of SARS-CoV-2 of multiple COVID-19 patients or bulk DNAseq of the tumor of a cancer patient. We describe the Concerti computational framework for inferring phylogenies in each of the two scenarios.To demonstrate the accuracy of the method, we reproduce some known results in both scenarios. We also make some additional discoveries.

Conclusions

Concerti successfully extracts and integrates information from multi-point samples, enabling the discovery of clinically plausible phylogenetic trees that capture the heterogeneity known to exist both spatially and temporally. These models can have direct therapeutic implications by highlighting “birth” of clones that may harbor resistance mechanisms to treatment, “death” of subclones with drug targets, and acquisition of functionally pertinent mutations in clones that may have seemed clinically irrelevant. Specifically in this paper we uncover new potential parallel mutations in the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In the context of cancer, we identify new clones harboring resistant mutations to therapy.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1186/s12864-021-07660-9
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.14.339986: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.14.339986v1 on bioRxiv