ArticleGenome medicine2015
Achieving high-sensitivity for clinical applications using augmented exome sequencing.
Article in Genome medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving Outcomes in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review of Immunotherapy in Multimodal Treatment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- A Randomized Phase II Study: CRS207/GVAX plus Anti-PD-1 and Anti-CTLA4 Recruits Mesothelin- and mKRAS-Specific T Cells into PDAC.Cancer immunology research · 2026Trial
- Molecular profiling of BRAF-V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer in the phase 3 BEACON CRC trial.Nature medicine · 2024Trial
- Biomarker Analyses Investigating Disease Biology and Associations with Outcomes in the JAVELIN Merkel 200 Trial of Avelumab in Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Trial
- Sotigalimab and/or nivolumab with chemotherapy in first-line metastatic pancreatic cancer: clinical and immunologic analyses from the randomized phase 2 PRINCE trial.Nature medicine · 2022Trial
- Ipilimumab alone or in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma who have progressed or relapsed on PD-1 blockade: clinical outcomes and translational biomarker analyses.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2022Trial
- De Novo Occurrence of a Variant in ARL3 and Apparent Autosomal Dominant Transmission of Retinitis Pigmentosa.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Predictors of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Response in dMMR Colorectal Cancer Using an Integrated Immune-Enhanced Multiomics Platform.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- Frequent genetic alterations in myositis autoantigen genes in cancer-associated dermatomyositis.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2026Article
- Clinical and translational results from a phase 1 trial of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel with nivolumab/ipilimumab or hydroxychloroquine/ipilimumab in untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Sequencing analysis reveals evidence of immune activation in advanced HER2 negative breast cancer responders treated with entinostat + nivolumab + ipilimumab.Research square · 2025Article
- Clinical and Translational Results from PORTER, a Multicohort Phase I Platform Trial of Combination Immunotherapy in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025Article
- Navigating Genetic Testing in Nephrology: Options and Decision-Making Strategies.Kidney international reports · 2025Review
- Article
- A machine learning algorithm with subclonal sensitivity reveals widespread pan-cancer human leukocyte antigen loss of heterozygosity.Nature communications · 2022Article
- A guide for the diagnosis of rare and undiagnosed disease: beyond the exome.Genome medicine · 2022Review
- Article
- Prediction of Immunotherapy Response in Melanoma through Combined Modeling of Neoantigen Burden and Immune-Related Resistance Mechanisms.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhole exome sequencing is increasingly used for the clinical evaluation of genetic disease, yet the variation of coverage and sensitivity over medically relevant parts of the genome remains poorly understood. Several sequencing-based assays continue to provide coverage that is inadequate for clinical assessment.
methodsUsing sequence data obtained from the NA12878 reference sample and pre-defined lists of medically-relevant protein-coding and noncoding sequences, we compared the breadth and depth of coverage obtained among four commercial exome capture platforms and whole genome sequencing. In addition, we evaluated the performance of an augmented exome strategy, ACE, that extends coverage in medically relevant regions and enhances coverage in areas that are challenging to sequence. Leveraging reference call-sets, we also examined the effects of improved coverage on variant detection sensitivity.
resultsWe observed coverage shortfalls with each of the conventional exome-capture and whole-genome platforms across several medically interpretable genes. These gaps included areas of the genome required for reporting recently established secondary findings (ACMG) and known disease-associated loci. The augmented exome strategy recovered many of these gaps, resulting in improved coverage in these areas. At clinically-relevant coverage levels (100 % bases covered at ≥20×), ACE improved coverage among genes in the medically interpretable genome (>90 % covered relative to 10-78 % with other platforms), the set of ACMG secondary finding genes (91 % covered relative to 4-75 % with other platforms) and a subset of variants known to be associated with human disease (99 % covered relative to 52-95 % with other platforms). Improved coverage translated into improvements in sensitivity, with ACE variant detection sensitivities (>97.5 % SNVs, >92.5 % InDels) exceeding that observed with conventional whole-exome and whole-genome platforms.
conclusionsClinicians should consider analytical performance when making clinical assessments, given that even a few missed variants can lead to reporting false negative results. An augmented exome strategy provides a level of coverage not achievable with other platforms, thus addressing concerns regarding the lack of sensitivity in clinically important regions. In clinical applications where comprehensive coverage of medically interpretable areas of the genome requires higher localized sequencing depth, an augmented exome approach offers both cost and performance advantages over other sequencing-based tests.
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.