ArticleBMC genetics2013
Assessment of clinical analytical sensitivity and specificity of next-generation sequencing for detection of simple and complex mutations.
Article in BMC genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of tissue acquisition techniques for Next-Generation Sequencing of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Cost of Genomic Testing for Biomarker-Driven Therapies in Oncology.Oncology and therapy · 2026Article
- Multiplex Ligation Probe Amplification and Sanger Sequencing: Light and Shade in the Diagnosis of Lysosomal Storage Disorders.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Measurable residual disease testing and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for AML: adapting Pre-MEASURE to clinical practice.Bone marrow transplantation · 2025Review
- From regulation to deregulation of p53 in hematologic malignancies: implications for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy.Biomarker research · 2024Review
- HerpesDRG: a comprehensive resource for human herpesvirus antiviral drug resistance genotyping.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- SomaticCells · 2024Article
- Review
- A mosaic pathogenic variant in MSH6 causes MSH6-deficient colorectal and endometrial cancer in a patient classified as suspected Lynch syndrome: a case report.Familial cancer · 2023Article
- Lineage-coupled clonal capture identifies clonal evolution mechanisms and vulnerabilities of BRAFCell discovery · 2022Article
- Impact of tobacco smoking on oral cancer genetics-A next-generation sequencing perspective.iMeta · 2022Article
- Identification of KIT and BRAF mutations in thyroid tissue using next-generation sequencing in an Ecuadorian patient: A case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Comparison of Culture With Antibiogram to Next-Generation Sequencing Using Bacterial Isolates and Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Gastric Biopsies.Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Use of SNP chips to detect rare pathogenic variants: retrospective, population based diagnostic evaluation.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Multigene model for predicting metastatic prostate cancer using circulating tumor cells by microfluidic magnetophoresis.Cancer science · 2021Article
- Differential responsiveness to BRAF inhibitors of melanoma cell lines BRAF V600E-mutated.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Cytogenetic and molecular diagnostic testing associated with prenatal and postnatal birth defects.Birth defects research · 2020Review
- The Latin American experience with a next generation sequencing genetic panel for recessive limb-girdle muscular weakness and Pompe disease.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2020Article
- Applications of Next Generation Sequencing to the Analysis of Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer.High-throughput · 2020Review
- An Analytically and Diagnostically Sensitive RNA Extraction and RT-qPCR Protocol for Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDetecting mutations in disease genes by full gene sequence analysis is common in clinical diagnostic laboratories. Sanger dideoxy terminator sequencing allows for rapid development and implementation of sequencing assays in the clinical laboratory, but it has limited throughput, and due to cost constraints, only allows analysis of one or at most a few genes in a patient. Next-generation sequencing (NGS), on the other hand, has evolved rapidly, although to date it has mainly been used for large-scale genome sequencing projects and is beginning to be used in the clinical diagnostic testing. One advantage of NGS is that many genes can be analyzed easily at the same time, allowing for mutation detection when there are many possible causative genes for a specific phenotype. In addition, regions of a gene typically not tested for mutations, like deep intronic and promoter mutations, can also be detected.
resultsHere we use 20 previously characterized Sanger-sequenced positive controls in disease-causing genes to demonstrate the utility of NGS in a clinical setting using standard PCR based amplification to assess the analytical sensitivity and specificity of the technology for detecting all previously characterized changes (mutations and benign SNPs). The positive controls chosen for validation range from simple substitution mutations to complex deletion and insertion mutations occurring in autosomal dominant and recessive disorders. The NGS data was 100% concordant with the Sanger sequencing data identifying all 119 previously identified changes in the 20 samples.
conclusionsWe have demonstrated that NGS technology is ready to be deployed in clinical laboratories. However, NGS and associated technologies are evolving, and clinical laboratories will need to invest significantly in staff and infrastructure to build the necessary foundation for success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.