You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Dear TransVar developers,
I have found a canno annotation problem with 2.4.8.20190122 that did not occur with 2.4.1.20180815 (same reference fasta and annotation files). After downgrading, it is working again:
With the old version, variants 'NM_001760.3:c.786_796dup' and 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759dupAG' from a SangerSeq experiment annotated without any errors, for example:
columns = input transcript gene strand coordinates(gDNA/cDNA/protein) region info.
values = 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759dupAG' 'NM_001760 (protein_coding)' 'CCND3' '-' 'chr6:g.41936061_41936062dupTC/c.758_759dupAG/p.S254Rfs*103' 'inside_[cds_in_exon_5]' 'CSQN=Frameshift;left_align_gDNA=g.41936057_41936058insCT;unalign_gDNA=g.41936058_41936059dupCT;left_align_cDNA=c.756_757insGA;unalign_cDNA=c.758_759dupAG;dbxref=GeneID:896,HGNC:HGNC:1585,MIM:123834;aliases=NP_001751;source=RefSeq'
With the new version, both dup variants result in no_valid_transcript_found. Querying SNVs 'NM_001760.3:c.758A>C' and 'NM_001760.3:c.759G>T' works with the new version, so theindividual reference bases seem to be correct (while, e.g., 'NM_001760.3:c.759C>G' or 'NM_001760.3:c.759A>G' fail as expected). Interestingly, querying the dup equivalent 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759AG>AGAG' still works with the new version:
'NM_001760.3:c.758_759AG>AGAG' 'NM_001760.4 (protein_coding)' 'CCND3' '-' 'chr6:g.41936061_41936062dupTC/c.760_761dupAG/p.S254Rfs*103' 'inside_[cds_in_exon_5]' 'CSQN=Frameshift;left_align_gDNA=g.41936057_41936058insCT;unalign_gDNA=g.41936058_41936059dupCT;left_align_cDNA=c.756_757insGA;unalign_cDNA=c.758_759dupAG;dbxref=GeneID:896,HGNC:HGNC:1585,MIM:123834;aliases=NP_001751;source=RefSeq'
This output suggests that after the transcript update from NM_001760.3 to NM_001760.4, this variant should now be named 'NM_001760.4:c.760_761dupAG'. But using this TransVar output as input (same new version 2.4.8.20190122) results in no_valid_transcript_found, again...?
Which of the three results is correct? Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Dear TransVar developers,
I have found a canno annotation problem with 2.4.8.20190122 that did not occur with 2.4.1.20180815 (same reference fasta and annotation files). After downgrading, it is working again:
With the old version, variants 'NM_001760.3:c.786_796dup' and 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759dupAG' from a SangerSeq experiment annotated without any errors, for example:
columns = input transcript gene strand coordinates(gDNA/cDNA/protein) region info.
values = 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759dupAG' 'NM_001760 (protein_coding)' 'CCND3' '-' 'chr6:g.41936061_41936062dupTC/c.758_759dupAG/p.S254Rfs*103' 'inside_[cds_in_exon_5]' 'CSQN=Frameshift;left_align_gDNA=g.41936057_41936058insCT;unalign_gDNA=g.41936058_41936059dupCT;left_align_cDNA=c.756_757insGA;unalign_cDNA=c.758_759dupAG;dbxref=GeneID:896,HGNC:HGNC:1585,MIM:123834;aliases=NP_001751;source=RefSeq'
With the new version, both dup variants result in no_valid_transcript_found. Querying SNVs 'NM_001760.3:c.758A>C' and 'NM_001760.3:c.759G>T' works with the new version, so theindividual reference bases seem to be correct (while, e.g., 'NM_001760.3:c.759C>G' or 'NM_001760.3:c.759A>G' fail as expected). Interestingly, querying the dup equivalent 'NM_001760.3:c.758_759AG>AGAG' still works with the new version:
'NM_001760.3:c.758_759AG>AGAG' 'NM_001760.4 (protein_coding)' 'CCND3' '-' 'chr6:g.41936061_41936062dupTC/c.760_761dupAG/p.S254Rfs*103' 'inside_[cds_in_exon_5]' 'CSQN=Frameshift;left_align_gDNA=g.41936057_41936058insCT;unalign_gDNA=g.41936058_41936059dupCT;left_align_cDNA=c.756_757insGA;unalign_cDNA=c.758_759dupAG;dbxref=GeneID:896,HGNC:HGNC:1585,MIM:123834;aliases=NP_001751;source=RefSeq'
This output suggests that after the transcript update from NM_001760.3 to NM_001760.4, this variant should now be named 'NM_001760.4:c.760_761dupAG'. But using this TransVar output as input (same new version 2.4.8.20190122) results in no_valid_transcript_found, again...?
Which of the three results is correct? Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: