Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28484260›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Benchmarking of RNA-sequencing analysis workflows using whole-transcriptome RT-qPCR expression data.

Celine Everaert, Manuel Luypaert, Jesper L V Maag, Quek Xiu Cheng, Marcel E Dinger, Jan Hellemans, Pieter Mestdagh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 221 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
221citing 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

221 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Transcriptomic Analysis IdentifiesAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Transcriptome-Based WGCNA Reveals Hub Genes Involved in Copper Resistance ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

161 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Celine EveraertCenter for Medical Genetics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Manuel LuypaertBiogazelle, Ghent, Belgium.
Jesper L V MaagKinghorn Cancer Center, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2578-8872
Quek Xiu ChengKinghorn Cancer Center, Sydney, Australia.
Marcel E DingerKinghorn Cancer Center, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4423-934X
Jan HellemansBiogazelle, Ghent, Belgium.
Pieter MestdaghCenter for Medical Genetics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. pieter.mestdagh@ugent.be.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RNA-sequencing has become the gold standard for whole-transcriptome gene expression quantification. Multiple algorithms have been developed to derive gene counts from sequencing reads. While a number of benchmarking studies have been conducted, the question remains how individual methods perform at accurately quantifying gene expression levels from RNA-sequencing reads. We performed an independent benchmarking study using RNA-sequencing data from the well established MAQCA and MAQCB reference samples. RNA-sequencing reads were processed using five workflows (Tophat-HTSeq, Tophat-Cufflinks, STAR-HTSeq, Kallisto and Salmon) and resulting gene expression measurements were compared to expression data generated by wet-lab validated qPCR assays for all protein coding genes. All methods showed high gene expression correlations with qPCR data. When comparing gene expression fold changes between MAQCA and MAQCB samples, about 85% of the genes showed consistent results between RNA-sequencing and qPCR data. Of note, each method revealed a small but specific gene set with inconsistent expression measurements. A significant proportion of these method-specific inconsistent genes were reproducibly identified in independent datasets. These genes were typically smaller, had fewer exons, and were lower expressed compared to genes with consistent expression measurements. We propose that careful validation is warranted when evaluating RNA-seq based expression profiles for this specific gene set.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingGene Expression RegulationWorkflowDatabases, GeneticHumansReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSequence Analysis, RNATranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID28484260
PMCPMC5431503

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.