ArticleAdvances in genomics and genetics2017
Differences between the genomes of lymphoblastoid cell lines and blood-derived samples.
Article in Advances in genomics and genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A high-throughput real-time PCR tissue-of-origin test to distinguish blood from lymphoblastoid cell line DNA for (epi)genomic studies.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of mitochondrial DNA sequences from whole blood and lymphoblastoid cell lines.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Estimating sequencing error rates using families.BioData mining · 2021Article
- Diagnosing Cornelia de Lange syndrome and related neurodevelopmental disorders using RNA sequencing.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020Article
- Investigating mitonuclear interactions in human admixed populations.Nature ecology & evolution · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) represent a convenient research tool for expanding the amount of biologic material available from an individual. LCLs are commonly used as reference materials, most notably from the Genome in a Bottle Consortium. However, the question remains how faithfully LCL-derived genome assemblies represent the germline genome of the donor individual as compared to the genome assemblies derived from peripheral blood mononuclear cells. We present an in-depth comparison of a large collection of LCL- and peripheral blood mononuclear cell-derived genomes in terms of distributions of coverage and copy number alterations. We found significant differences in the depth of coverage and copy number calls, which may be driven by differential replication timing. Importantly, these copy number changes preferentially affect regions closer to genes and with higher GC content. This suggests that genomic studies based on LCLs may display locus-specific biases, and that conclusions based on analysis of depth of coverage and copy number variation may require further scrutiny.
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.