Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26681316›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2016

VisCap: inference and visualization of germ-line copy-number variants from targeted clinical sequencing data.

Trevor J Pugh, Sami S Amr, Mark J Bowser, Sivakumar Gowrisankar, Elizabeth Hynes, Lisa M Mahanta, Heidi L Rehm, Birgit Funke, Matthew S Lebo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Genes · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Case report: Compound heterozygosity inFrontiers in pediatrics · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. New Tmc1 Deafness Mutations Impact Mechanotransduction in Auditory Hair Cells.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Trevor J PughPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8073-5888
Sami S AmrLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0927-6057
Mark J BowserLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sivakumar GowrisankarLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Elizabeth HynesLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3817-2145
Lisa M MahantaLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Heidi L RehmLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6025-0015
Birgit FunkeLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Matthew S LeboLaboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Personalized Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop and validate VisCap, a software program targeted to clinical laboratories for inference and visualization of germ-line copy-number variants (CNVs) from targeted next-generation sequencing data.

methodsVisCap calculates the fraction of overall sequence coverage assigned to genomic intervals and computes log2 ratios of these values to the median of reference samples profiled using the same test configuration. Candidate CNVs are called when log2 ratios exceed user-defined thresholds.

resultsWe optimized VisCap using 14 cases with known CNVs, followed by prospective analysis of 1,104 cases referred for diagnostic DNA sequencing. To verify calls in the prospective cohort, we used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to confirm 10/27 candidate CNVs and 72/72 copy-neutral genomic regions scored by VisCap. We also used a genome-wide bead array to confirm the absence of CNV calls across panels applied to 10 cases. To improve specificity, we instituted a visual scoring system that enabled experienced reviewers to differentiate true-positive from false-positive calls with minimal impact on laboratory workflow.

conclusionsVisCap is a sensitive method for inferring CNVs from targeted sequence data from targeted gene panels. Visual scoring of data underlying CNV calls is a critical step to reduce false-positive calls for follow-up testing.Genet Med 18 7, 712-719.Genetics in Medicine (2016); 18 7, 712-719. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.156.

Indexed as

Pathology, MolecularSoftwareDNA Copy Number VariationsGenome, HumanGerm-Line MutationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID26681316
PMCPMC4940431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.