PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Benchmarking scRNA-seq copy number variation callers.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Schmid, K.T.* ; Symeonidi, A. ; Hlushchenko, D.* ; Richter, M.L.* ; Tijhuis, A.E.* ; Foijer, F.* ; Colomé-Tatché, M.

Benchmarking scRNA-seq copy number variation callers.

Nat. Commun. 16:8777 (2025)

Publ. Version/Full Text

Research data

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Gold

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

Copy number variations (CNVs), the gain or loss of genomic regions, are associated with disease, especially cancer. Single cell technologies offer new possibilities to capture within-sample heterogeneity of CNVs and identify subclones relevant for tumor progression and treatment outcome. Several computational tools have been developed to identify CNVs from scRNA-seq data. However, an independent benchmarking of them is lacking. Here, we evaluate six popular methods in their ability to correctly identify ground truth CNVs, euploid cells and subclonal structures in 21 scRNA-seq datasets. We discover dataset-specific factors influencing the performance, including dataset size, the number and type of CNVs in the sample and the choice of the reference dataset. Methods which include allelic information perform more robustly for large droplet-based datasets, but require higher runtime. Furthermore, the methods differ in their additional functionalities. We offer a benchmarking pipeline to identify the optimal method for new datasets, and improve methods' performance.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

15.700

0.000