Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve % of perfectly replicated CDR3s when using a NT CDR3 #28

Open
JamieHeather opened this issue Oct 14, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Improve % of perfectly replicated CDR3s when using a NT CDR3 #28

JamieHeather opened this issue Oct 14, 2022 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@JamieHeather
Copy link
Owner

Currently when submitting a rearrangements using nucleotide CDR3s, Stitchr will produce a small proportion of TCRs where the stitched nucleotide sequence does not exactly replicate the sequence that appeared in the original TCR (see Fig 3D of the NAR paper. This is due to Stitchr determining the edge of the germline-encodable sequence at the codon level, but V(D)J recombination will often delete only part of a codon and then P/NP/D gene nucleotide additions can complete a different but redundant codon encoding the same amino acid (see Fig 1C of the paper. Of course the final stitched amino acid may be the same, but it would be nice for these nucleotide-provided CDR3s to perfectly match the actual rearranged TCR, without needing to resort to the slower seamless option.

It's just occurred to me, but the vast majority of these mismatches could probably be avoided by with a simple switch. Currently the NT-CDR3 option copies the AA-CDR3 option, defining the wholly-germline encodable and then filling in with the non-templated sequence. Instead, when using NT-CDR3 the script could delete one amino acid further back from the edge of what is potentially encodable, and simply add back in an extra 3 NT from the provided CDR3 sequence.

It still wouldn't be 100% perfect (as rare TCRs will have coincidentally deleted further back and replaced multiple redundant codons), but it would improve accuracy a lot.

Giving the sparsity of applications that need this I won't be implemented this in a hurry, but I'm adding this here in case anyone needed it and fancies implementing.

@JamieHeather JamieHeather added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 14, 2022
@JamieHeather JamieHeather self-assigned this Oct 14, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant