Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32000839›Full record

ArticleGenome medicine2020

A highly sensitive and specific workflow for detecting rare copy-number variants from exome sequencing data.

Ramakrishnan Rajagopalan, Jill R Murrell, Minjie Luo, Laura K Conlin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Whole exome sequencing: a new era in prenatal diagnostics.Journal of translational medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ramakrishnan RajagopalanDivision of Genomic Diagnostics, Department of Pathology and Laboaratory Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jill R MurrellDivision of Genomic Diagnostics, Department of Pathology and Laboaratory Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Minjie LuoDivision of Genomic Diagnostics, Department of Pathology and Laboaratory Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Laura K ConlinDivision of Genomic Diagnostics, Department of Pathology and Laboaratory Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA. conlinl@email.chop.edu.
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia · USDrexel University · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Applying Genomic Sequencing in PediatricsU01HG006546 · NHGRI · CHILDREN'S HOSP OF PHILADELPHIA · PI KRANTZ, IAN D. · 2012 to 2016
$10.6M
Improving detection and interpretation of clinically relevant structural variationR01HG009708 · NHGRI · CHILDREN'S HOSP OF PHILADELPHIA · PI CONLIN, LAURA K · 2017 to 2020
$2.9M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG009708NHGRI NIH HHS R01-HG009708NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006546NHGRI NIH HHS U01- HG006546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExome sequencing (ES) is a first-tier diagnostic test for many suspected Mendelian disorders. While it is routine to detect small sequence variants, it is not a standard practice in clinical settings to detect germline copy-number variants (CNVs) from ES data due to several reasons relating to performance. In this work, we comprehensively characterized one of the most sensitive ES-based CNV tools, ExomeDepth, against SNP array, a standard of care test in clinical settings to detect genome-wide CNVs.

methodsWe propose a modified ExomeDepth workflow by excluding exons with low mappability prior to variant calling to drastically reduce the false positives originating from the repetitive regions of the genome, and an iterative variant calling framework to assess the reproducibility. We used a cohort of 307 individuals with clinical ES data and clinical SNP array to estimate the sensitivity and false discovery rate of the CNV detection using exome sequencing. Further, we performed targeted testing of the STRC gene in 1972 individuals. To reduce the number of variants for downstream analysis, we performed a large-scale iterative variant calling process with random control cohorts to assess the reproducibility of the CNVs.

resultsThe modified workflow presented in this paper reduced the number of total variants identified by one third while retaining a higher sensitivity of 97% and resulted in an improved false discovery rate of 11.4% compared to the default ExomeDepth pipeline. The exclusion of exons with low mappability removes 4.5% of the exons, including a subset of exons (0.6%) in disease-associated genes which are intractable by short-read next-generation sequencing (NGS). Results from the reproducibility analysis showed that the clinically reported variants were reproducible 100% of the time and that the modified workflow can be used to rank variants from high to low confidence. Targeted testing of 30 CNVs identified in STRC, a challenging gene to ascertain by NGS, showed a 100% validation rate.

conclusionsIn summary, we introduced a modification to the default ExomeDepth workflow to reduce the false positives originating from the repetitive regions of the genome, created a large-scale iterative variant calling framework for reproducibility, and provided recommendations for implementation in clinical settings.

Indexed as

Gene DosageExome SequencingFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleGenetic TestingHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMaleIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsSTRC protein, humanClinical exome sequencingCopy-number variation

Identifiers

PMID32000839
PMCPMC6993336
OpenAlexW3008588777

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.