Chimerism report

Recipient ID:SRP434573 demo (F2 into M1)
Sample:1_199_F2-M1_v1
Transplant type:HSCT
Donor 1:M1 (unrelated)
allomix version:0.3.0
Report generated:2026-06-29 00:00:00 (example build)

Result

QC verdict
! REVIEW
Donor fraction
99.72%
(95% CI 99.6 to 99.8)
Host (recipient)
0.28%
(95% CI 0.2 to 0.4)
Sample sensitivity (as a donor fraction): limit of blank 0.06%, limit of detection 0.12%.
How the donor and host fractions are estimated

The donor fraction is a maximum-likelihood estimate from the alternate and reference read depths at informative markers (loci where the host and donor genotypes differ), following Crysup and Woerner (2022). The host (recipient) fraction is the remainder. The 95% confidence interval reflects sampling at the sequenced depth.

Limit of blank is the highest donor fraction expected from a true-zero sample at this sample's depth and marker set; limit of detection is the lowest fraction reliably distinguished from blank. Both are specific to this sample.

Host-presence detection

Low-level host signal detected
Detection p-value (LRT): <0.001; pooled-Poisson p-value: <0.001.
Estimated host fraction: 0.278% (95% CI 0.3 to 0.3).
Markers used: 349; error-rate source: per-site; artifact-filtered: 3.
How host-presence detection works

At markers where every donor is homozygous for the same allele and the host carries the other allele, that donor-absent allele appears only at the sequencing-error background in a pure-donor sample. A one-sided test (a likelihood ratio, with a pooled-Poisson cross-check) asks whether the observed donor-absent reads exceed that background, that is, whether any host signal is present.

This answers "is the host detectable?" directly, separately from the size of the donor fraction estimated above, and is most informative near the detection limit.

Quality control

Overall verdict: ! REVIEW

590 of 1058 input markers were informative; 501 used in the fit (excluded: 89 outliers, 1 low-depth).

1 QC check flagged (listed below).

Markers

CheckValueReference
Total markers (input)1058
Shared across samples872
Informative590
Used in fit501
Excluded: low depth1
Excluded: quality0
Excluded: outlier89
Robust refit dropped15%review if > 15%

Sequencing depth (admixture)

CheckValueReference
Mean depth19765xwarn if < 100x
Median depth15796x
Minimum depth147x

Model fit

CheckValueReference
Goodness-of-fit p0.997review if < 0.01
Goodness-of-fit p (pre-trim)<0.001

Contamination

CheckValueReference
Contamination fraction0.060%review if > 1%
Contamination p<0.001
Contamination markers90

Sample-swap

CheckValueReference
Swap discordant fraction0.00%
Swap p1.000review if < 0.001
Consensus-homozygous markers90

Shared-het balance

CheckValueReference
Imbalanced fraction2.3%review if > 15%
Pooled VAF0.499
Shared-het markers172

Reference-sample relatedness

PairCoefficient95% CIRelationshipConfidenceMarkers
host vs donor-0.142(95% CI -0.142 to -0.142)unrelatedhigh853
How the quality-control checks work

Goodness-of-fit compares the observed allele depths to those predicted by the fitted fraction; a low p-value means the single-fraction model fits poorly (an unexpected marker, an extra contributor, or a genotyping error).

Contamination measures third-party DNA at markers where the host and every donor share the same homozygote: minor-allele reads there cannot come from either contributor, so their excess over the sequencing-error floor estimates contamination (for example index hopping or cross-contamination).

Sample-swap counts those same shared-homozygote sites where the minor allele is individually significant; many such sites indicate a whole extra genome (a swap or wrong-patient VCF).

Shared-het balance checks the admixture allele fraction at markers heterozygous in the host and every donor, where it should sit near 50% whatever the mixing fraction. Many sites skewed away from balance point to contamination, copy-number or allelic imbalance, or a sample mix-up.

Relatedness is a kinship coefficient between the reference samples, compared against the declared relationship to catch mislabelled or unexpectedly related inputs.

The robust refit re-fits after dropping markers whose residuals are large outliers; dropping a large fraction is itself flagged, since it points at host copy-number change or a genotyping problem.

Warnings