Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30669152›Full record

ArticleHuman heredity2018

Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.

Wendy J Huss, Qiang Hu, Sean T Glenn, Kalyan J Gangavarapu, Jianmin Wang, Jesse D Luce, Paul K Quinn, Elizabeth A Brese, Fenglin Zhan, Jeffrey M Conroy and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Human heredity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Wendy J HussDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Qiang HuDepartments of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Sean T GlennCenter of Personalized Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Kalyan J GangavarapuDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Jianmin WangDepartments of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Jesse D LuceCenter of Personalized Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Paul K QuinnCenter of Personalized Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Elizabeth A BreseDepartment of Pathology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Fenglin ZhanPET/CT Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of the University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China.
Jeffrey M ConroyCenter of Personalized Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Gyorgy ParaghDepartment of Dermatology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Barbara A FosterDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Carl D MorrisonCenter of Personalized Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Song LiuDepartments of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Lei WeiDepartments of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, USA, Lei.Wei@RoswellPark.org.
Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · USCancer Genetics (United States) · USUniversity of Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

Two-Spirit Films in Indigenous Cancer HealthP30CA016056 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI Dean G. Tang · 1985 to 2026
$116.6M
RPCI-UPCI Ovarian Cancer SPOREP50CA159981 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI MOYSICH, KIRSTEN B., ODUNSI, KUNLE · 2013 to 2025
$19.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016056NCI NIH HHS P50 CA159981
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in single-cell sequencing provide unprecedented opportunities for clinical examination of circulating tumor cells, cancer stem cells, and other rare cells responsible for disease progression and drug resistance. On the genomic level, single-cell whole exome sequencing (scWES) started to gain popularity with its unique potentials in characterizing mutational landscapes at a single-cell level. Currently, there is little known about the performance of different exome capture kits in scWES. Nextera rapid capture (NXT; Illumina, Inc.) has been the only exome capture kit recommended for scWES by Fluidigm C1, a widely accessed system in single-cell preparation.

resultsIn this study, we compared the performance of NXT following Fluidigm's protocol with Agilent SureSelectXT Target Enrichment System (AGL), another exome capture kit widely used for bulk sequencing. We created DNA libraries of 192 single cells isolated from spheres grown from a melanoma specimen using Fluidigm C1. Twelve high-yield cells were selected to perform dual-exome capture and sequencing using AGL and NXT in parallel. After mapping and coverage analysis, AGL outperformed NXT in coverage uniformity, mapping rates of reads, exome capture rates, and low PCR duplicate rates. For germline variant calling, AGL achieved better performance in overlap with known variants in dbSNP and transition-transversion ratios. Using calls from high coverage bulk sequencing from blood DNA as the golden standard, AGL-based scWES demonstrated high positive predictive values, and medium to high sensitivity. Lastly, we evaluated somatic mutation calling by comparing single-cell data with the matched blood sequence as control. On average, 300 mutations were identified in each cell. In 10 of 12 cells, higher numbers of mutations were identified using AGL than NXT, probably caused by coverage depth. When mutations are adequately covered in both AGL and NXT data, the two methods showed very high concordance (93-100% per cell).

conclusionsOur results suggest that AGL can also be used for scWES when there is sufficient DNA, and it yields better data quality than the current Fluidigm's protocol using NXT.

Indexed as

ExomeGenetic VariationGerm CellsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMutationPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSingle-Cell AnalysisAgilent SureSelectExome captureIllumina NexteraSingle-cell sequencingSomatic mutations

Identifiers

PMID30669152
PMCPMC7868962
OpenAlexW2913382714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.