ArticlePloS one2017
Evaluation of exome variants using the Ion Proton Platform to sequence error-prone regions.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting high confidence ctDNA somatic variants with ensemble machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Sharing genetic variants with the NGS pipeline is essential for effective genomic data sharing and reproducibility in health information exchange.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Diagnostic Yield and Treatment Impact of Targeted Exome Sequencing in Early-Onset Epilepsy.Frontiers in neurology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Ion Proton sequencer from Thermo Fisher accurately determines sequence variants from target regions with a rapid turnaround time at a low cost. However, misleading variant-calling errors can occur. We performed a systematic evaluation and manual curation of read-level alignments for the 675 ultrarare variants reported by the Ion Proton sequencer from 27 whole-exome sequencing data but that are not present in either the 1000 Genomes Project and the Exome Aggregation Consortium. We classified positive variant calls into 393 highly likely false positives, 126 likely false positives, and 156 likely true positives, which comprised 58.2%, 18.7%, and 23.1% of the variants, respectively. We identified four distinct error patterns of variant calling that may be bioinformatically corrected when using different strategies: simplicity region, SNV cluster, peripheral sequence read, and base inversion. Local de novo assembly successfully corrected 201 (38.7%) of the 519 highly likely or likely false positives. We also demonstrate that the two sequencing kits from Thermo Fisher (the Ion PI Sequencing 200 kit V3 and the Ion PI Hi-Q kit) exhibit different error profiles across different error types. A refined calling algorithm with better polymerase may improve the performance of the Ion Proton sequencing platform.
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.