ArticlePloS one2015
Comparison of sequencing based CNV discovery methods using monozygotic twin quartets.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- A comprehensive benchmarking of WGS-based deletion structural variant callers.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- CNVpytor: a tool for copy number variation detection and analysis from read depth and allele imbalance in whole-genome sequencing.GigaScience · 2021Article
- Comprehensive characterization of copy number variation (CNV) called from array, long- and short-read data.BMC genomics · 2021Article
- X-CNV: genome-wide prediction of the pathogenicity of copy number variations.Genome medicine · 2021Article
- MetaCNV - a consensus approach to infer accurate copy numbers from low coverage data.BMC medical genomics · 2020Article
- CNV analysis of Meishan pig by next-generation sequencing and effects ofJournal of animal science and biotechnology · 2020Article
- A Survey of Copy Number Variation in the Porcine Genome Detected From Whole-Genome Sequence.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- WISExome: a within-sample comparison approach to detect copy number variations in whole exome sequencing data.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Article
- Evaluation of three read-depth based CNV detection tools using whole-exome sequencing data.Molecular cytogenetics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe advent of high throughput sequencing methods breeds an important amount of technical challenges. Among those is the one raised by the discovery of copy-number variations (CNVs) using whole-genome sequencing data. CNVs are genomic structural variations defined as a variation in the number of copies of a large genomic fragment, usually more than one kilobase. Here, we aim to compare different CNV calling methods in order to assess their ability to consistently identify CNVs by comparison of the calls in 9 quartets of identical twin pairs. The use of monozygotic twins provides a means of estimating the error rate of each algorithm by observing CNVs that are inconsistently called when considering the rules of Mendelian inheritance and the assumption of an identical genome between twins. The similarity between the calls from the different tools and the advantage of combining call sets were also considered.
resultsERDS and CNVnator obtained the best performance when considering the inherited CNV rate with a mean of 0.74 and 0.70, respectively. Venn diagrams were generated to show the agreement between the different algorithms, before and after filtering out familial inconsistencies. This filtering revealed a high number of false positives for CNVer and Breakdancer. A low overall agreement between the methods suggested a high complementarity of the different tools when calling CNVs. The breakpoint sensitivity analysis indicated that CNVnator and ERDS achieved better resolution of CNV borders than the other tools. The highest inherited CNV rate was achieved through the intersection of these two tools (81%).
conclusionsThis study showed that ERDS and CNVnator provide good performance on whole genome sequencing data with respect to CNV consistency across families, CNV breakpoint resolution and CNV call specificity. The intersection of the calls from the two tools would be valuable for CNV genotyping pipelines.
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.