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
In sex-mismatched transplants the sex chromosomes carry a strong, independent chimerism signal that we currently throw away. A colleague raised it: "it seems a shame not to employ that in the fraction of mismatched transplants." Roughly half of transplants are sex-mismatched, and we often know donor/recipient sex up front, so this is more actionable for us than it is for forensic tools.
This is deliberately separate from #46. That issue recovers chrX markers for sex-matched pairs, where the ploidy matches and the markers slot into the existing diploid MLE unchanged. This issue is about the mismatch case, which is a different measurement and should not be folded into the autosomal fraction estimate.
Why keep it separate from the MLE
chrY is a different unit. chrY has essentially no heterozygous SNPs; the engraftment signal is normalized read depth (chrY-vs-autosome coverage ratio), not a REF/ALT allele fraction. It does not fit the beta-binomial VAF likelihood. Mixing depth-based and VAF-based terms into one likelihood is fragile to calibrate.
chrX in a mismatch breaks the /2 dosage math. The male is hemizygous (1 chrX copy) vs 2 in the female, so the read fraction at a chrX marker is weighted by copy-number x cellularity, not cellularity alone. The chrX "f" is not the same f as the autosomal f. Handling it means per-sample ploidy and a copy-number-weighted mixture term, i.e. mutating the validated diploid core (PLOIDY, ref_dose, the /2).
The value is its orthogonality. A sex-chrom estimate fails in completely different ways than the SNP MLE. Reported as an independent estimate alongside the fraction, it becomes a genuine cross-check: agreement raises confidence; disagreement flags a problem (sample swap, contamination, wrong sex metadata). Averaging it into the headline number destroys exactly that.
Reference point
Demixtify (Crysup & Woerner, the basis for our MLE) is explicitly autosomal-only: the README states it "is only for interpretting autosomal biallelic SNPs" and every bundled panel is chr1-chr22. So there is no upstream model to copy for sex chroms; this would be a deliberate, HSCT-specific addition.
Proposed shape
A separate module, only active when host and donor sex are known/inferred to differ.
Primary readout: chrY depth ratio (clean binary/semi-quantitative engraftment-direction signal; direction depends on which of host/donor is male).
Present the result next to the MLE fraction as an independent confirmation + a concordance QC check. Do not blend it into the reported chimerism percentage.
Panel-agnostic: only works if the input panel actually carries chrX/chrY amplicons; our deployment panel has ~27 chrX, chrY content to be checked. Degrade gracefully when absent.
Exclude PAR1/PAR2 (diploid in both sexes).
Evidence: [speculative]. Lower priority than the sex-matched recovery in #46, but higher-value per marker because the signal is orthogonal.
Idea
In sex-mismatched transplants the sex chromosomes carry a strong, independent chimerism signal that we currently throw away. A colleague raised it: "it seems a shame not to employ that in the fraction of mismatched transplants." Roughly half of transplants are sex-mismatched, and we often know donor/recipient sex up front, so this is more actionable for us than it is for forensic tools.
This is deliberately separate from #46. That issue recovers chrX markers for sex-matched pairs, where the ploidy matches and the markers slot into the existing diploid MLE unchanged. This issue is about the mismatch case, which is a different measurement and should not be folded into the autosomal fraction estimate.
Why keep it separate from the MLE
PLOIDY,ref_dose, the/2).Reference point
Demixtify (Crysup & Woerner, the basis for our MLE) is explicitly autosomal-only: the README states it "is only for interpretting autosomal biallelic SNPs" and every bundled panel is chr1-chr22. So there is no upstream model to copy for sex chroms; this would be a deliberate, HSCT-specific addition.
Proposed shape
Prerequisites / caveats
Evidence:
[speculative]. Lower priority than the sex-matched recovery in #46, but higher-value per marker because the signal is orthogonal.