Luca Denti, Thomas Krannich, Tomas Vinar, Rayan Chikhi, Paola Bonizzoni, Brona Brejova, Fereydoun Hormozdiari. Anyone can be the best: Impact of diverse methodologies on the evaluation of structural variant callers. Technical Report 2025.08.28.672546, bioRxiv, 2025.

Download preprint: not available

Download from publisher: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.08.28.672546

Related web page: not available

Bibliography entry: BibTeX

Abstract:

Structural variants (SVs) are medium and large-scale genomic alterations 
that shape phenotypic diversity and disease risk. Numerous methods have been 
proposed for discovering SVs, however their benchmarking has been 
inconsistent across studies, often resulting in contradictory findings. One 
of the main sources of conflicting evaluation re-sults is the lack of 
consistency in the SV callsets used as ground truth, ranging from curated 
callsets released by consortia to more recent approaches that construct 
callsets from high-quality telomere-to-telomere de novo haplotype 
assemblies. The discrepancies between benchmarks are further compounded by 
the choice of the reference genome (GRCh37, GRCh38, and T2T-CHM13), where 
using T2T-CHM13reveals a different deletion/insertion profile, indicating 
reduced reference bias. We evaluated the performance of several state-of-
the-art SV discovery methods from long-read whole-genome sequencing data and 
observed substantial variation in their performance and rankings, depending 
on the choice of ground truth, reference genome, and genomic regions used 
for evaluation. Counter-intuitively, the more complete reference genome T2T-
CHM13does not inherently solve the problem of SV benchmarking; instead it 
reveals the limitations of each detection method in complex genomic regions. 
The substantial variation in detection accuracy across different genomic 
regions calls for additional caution in downstream analyses and in drawing 
conclusions based on predicted SVs. These findings underscore the complexity 
of evaluating SV detection methods and highlight the need for careful 
consideration and, ideally, field-standard best practices when reporting 
performance metrics.