Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41301450›Full record

ArticleBiomolecules2025

Comparative Evaluation of Mutect2, Strelka2, and FreeBayes for Somatic SNV Detection in Synthetic and Clinical Whole-Exome Sequencing Data.

Igor López-Cade, Alicia Gómez-Sanz, Adrián Sanvicente, Cristina Díaz-Tejeiro, Aránzazu Manzano, Pedro Pérez-Segura, Balázs Győrffy, Alberto Ocaña, Miguel de la Hoya, Vanesa García-Barberán

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Biomolecules, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Igor López-CadeExperimental Therapeutics Unit, Oncology Department, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC), 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8069-1507
Alicia Gómez-Sanz"Clinical and Translational Research in Oncology" Group, Molecular Oncology Laboratory, IdISSC, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Adrián SanvicenteExperimental Therapeutics Unit, Oncology Department, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC), 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Cristina Díaz-TejeiroExperimental Therapeutics Unit, Oncology Department, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC), 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Aránzazu ManzanoDepartment of Medical Oncology, IdISSC, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Pedro Pérez-SeguraDepartment of Medical Oncology, IdISSC, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Balázs GyőrffyDepartment of Bioinformatics, Semmelweis University, H-1094 Budapest, Hungary.
Alberto OcañaExperimental Therapeutics Unit, Oncology Department, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC), 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1067-9630
Miguel de la Hoya"Clinical and Translational Research in Oncology" Group, Molecular Oncology Laboratory, IdISSC, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8113-1410
Vanesa García-Barberán"Clinical and Translational Research in Oncology" Group, Molecular Oncology Laboratory, IdISSC, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2531-0203

Funding

CRIS Cancer Foundation AOF.C01CRISCRIS Cancer Foundation AOF.M01CRISInstituto de Salud Carlos III PI19/00808Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI24-00267MICIU/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 PID2022-142361OB-I00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Somatic variant calling is a critical step in cancer genome analysis, but the performance of available tools can vary depending on their underlying algorithms and filtering strategies. We compared three widely used variant callers-Mutect2, Strelka2, and FreeBayes-for their performance in somatic single-nucleotide variant (SNV) detection using both synthetic and real whole-exome sequencing (WES) data. Synthetic data were generated by introducing 4709 SNVs into a variant-free BAM file, while real data consisted of tumor and matched normal WES samples from five ovarian cancer (OC) patients. All callers were run using the nf-core/sarek pipeline with default settings and appropriate filtering. In the synthetic dataset, all tools showed high precision (~99.9%), with Mutect2 achieving the highest recall (63.1%), followed by Strelka2 (46.3%) and FreeBayes (45.2%). In real samples, FreeBayes detected the most variants, and only 5.1% of SNVs were shared across all three tools. We then integrated calls with SomaticSeq in consensus mode (Mutect2 + Strelka2) and kept variants with stronger allelic signals-showing higher VAFs and, typically, higher coverages relative to single-caller only. Caller-exclusive variants showed significant differences in allele frequency and sequencing depth. These results highlight substantial variability in SNV detection across tools. While all showed high specificity, differences in sensitivity and variant profiles underscore the need for context-specific caller selection or ensemble approaches in cancer genomics.

Indexed as

Exome SequencingOvarian NeoplasmsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSoftwareAlgorithmsFemaleHumansread depthsomaticvariant allele frequencyvariant callerWES

Identifiers

PMID41301450
PMCPMC12650410

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.