ArticleHuman immunology2015
Concordance of next generation sequence-based and sequence specific oligonucleotide probe-based HLA-DRB1 genotyping.
Article in Human immunology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic fine mapping of systemic lupus erythematosus MHC associations in Europeans and African Americans.Human molecular genetics · 2018Article
- Evaluation of computational programs to predict HLA genotypes from genomic sequencing data.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Next generation sequencing (NGS) of clonally amplified DNA, using Roche 454 technology, was used to genotype HLA-DRB1, DRB3, DRB4, and DRB5 loci (exon 2 only) from a set of 993 samples from newborns with maternally-reported African American ancestry. DRB1 exon 2 was genotyped previously on the same sample set using sequence-specific oligonucleotide probe (SSOP) technology. Comparison of the genotype calls from both methods indicated concordance of 92.3%. Some discordance was expected due to the higher resolution of NGS data, compared to SSOP data. This resulted from selection of the incorrect allele from the ambiguity string produced by SSOP genotyping. Of 76 discordant genotypes, only three were due to resolution of ambiguity with the NGS method. The low percent of changes due to the increased resolution of the NGS method instills confidence in the overall value of previous data genotyped with moderate resolution methods, i.e., the vast majority of alleles present in a population are those that are detectable at moderate resolution. The remaining 73 discordant genotypes resulted from preventable errors in sample handling, data interpretation, and data entry. These results underscore the potential for error that can result from factors such as low quality genomic DNA, manual data entry, and interpretation of marginal genotyping results. Optimization of genomic DNA quality, automation of genotyping steps wherever possible, and use of the highest resolution technology available can lead to dramatic improvements in HLA genotype data quality. NGS-based methodology generated data of superior quality and accuracy compared to the SSOP system.
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.