ReviewMutation research2015
High-throughput sequencing in mutation detection: A new generation of genotoxicity tests?
Review in Mutation research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Somatic mutations and genome mosaicism in aging and disease.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2026Review
- High cancer-associated mutational burden in normal blood of xeroderma pigmentosum group C, but not groups A, D, or F.Blood neoplasia · 2026Article
- Uniquely high spontaneous mutational load in blood cells of XP-C patients.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Revisiting the approaches to DNA damage detection in genetic toxicology: insights and regulatory implications.BioData mining · 2025Article
- An integrated in vitro carcinogenicity test that distinguishes between genotoxic carcinogens, non-genotoxic carcinogens, and non-carcinogens.Mutagenesis · 2024Review
- Somatic mutation burden in relation to aging and functional life span: implications for cellular reprogramming and rejuvenation.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2023Review
- Genotoxicity assessment: opportunities, challenges and perspectives for quantitative evaluations of dose-response data.Archives of toxicology · 2023Review
- Single-strand specific nuclease enhances accuracy of error-corrected sequencing and improves rare mutation-detection sensitivity.Archives of toxicology · 2022Article
- Clinical implementation of an oncology-specific family health history risk assessment tool.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2021Article
- Direct quantification of in vivo mutagenesis and carcinogenesis using duplex sequencing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Next generation sequencing data for use in risk assessment.Current opinion in toxicology · 2019Article
- The State-of-the Art of Environmental Toxicogenomics: Challenges and Perspectives of "Omics" Approaches Directed to Toxicant Mixtures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Review
- Somatic Mutagenesis in Mammals and Its Implications for Human Disease and Aging.Annual review of genetics · 2018Review
- Bleomycin-induced genome structural variations in normal, non-tumor cells.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- A genome-wide mutation analysis method enabling high-throughput identification of chemical mutagen signatures.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Enhancing the accuracy of next-generation sequencing for detecting rare and subclonal mutations.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018Review
- Analysis of BRCA1/2 mutation spectrum and prevalence in unselected Chinese breast cancer patients by next-generation sequencing.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2017Article
- The various aspects of genetic and epigenetic toxicology: testing methods and clinical applications.Journal of translational medicine · 2017Review
- Base changes in tumour DNA have the power to reveal the causes and evolution of cancer.Oncogene · 2017Review
- Do DNA Double-Strand Breaks Drive Aging?Molecular cell · 2016Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The advent of next generation sequencing (NGS) technology has provided the means to directly analyze the genetic material in primary cells or tissues of any species in a high throughput manner for mutagenic effects of potential genotoxic agents. In principle, direct, genome-wide sequencing of human primary cells and/or tissue biopsies would open up opportunities to identify individuals possibly exposed to mutagenic agents, thereby replacing current risk assessment procedures based on surrogate markers and extrapolations from animal studies. NGS-based tests can also precisely characterize the mutation spectra induced by genotoxic agents, improving our knowledge of their mechanism of action. Thus far, NGS has not been widely employed in genetic toxicology due to the difficulties in measuring low-abundant somatic mutations. Here, we review different strategies to employ NGS for the detection of somatic mutations in a cost-effective manner and discuss the potential applicability of these methods in testing the mutagenicity of genotoxic agents.
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.