ArticleScientific reports2020
Comparison of Target Enrichment Platforms for Circulating Tumor DNA Detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of ESR1 mutation detection by cell-free DNA in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Benchmarking UMI-aware and standard variant callers for low frequency ctDNA variant detection.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- A pilot study to evaluate tissue- and plasma-based DNA driver mutations in a cohort of patients with pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Comprehensive clinical assays for molecular diagnostics of gliomas: the current state and future prospects.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Review
- Mutation profiles in circulating cell-free DNA predict acquired resistance to olaparib in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma.Cancer science · 2022Article
- Target Enrichment Approaches for Next-Generation Sequencing Applications in Oncology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Novel hybridization- and tag-based error-corrected method for sensitive ctDNA mutation detection using ion semiconductor sequencing.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The utility of cfDNA in TGCT patient management: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022Review
- Role of Circulating Tumor DNA in Gastrointestinal Cancers: Current Knowledge and Perspectives.Cancers · 2021Review
- CAPP-seq analysis of circulating tumor DNA from patients with EGFR T790M-positive lung cancer after osimertinib.International journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Implementation of Next Generation Sequencing-Based Liquid Biopsy for Clinical Molecular Diagnostics in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Comparison of two targeted ultra-deep sequencing technologies for analysis of plasma circulating tumour DNA in endocrine-therapy-resistant breast cancer patients.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Patient specific circulating tumor DNA fingerprints to monitor treatment response across multiple tumors.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Optimizing Liquid Biopsy: Spike-In Panel Approach for ctDNA Copy Number Variation Analysis.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer-related mortality of solid tumors remains the major cause of death worldwide. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) released from cancer cells harbors specific somatic mutations. Sequencing ctDNA opens opportunities to non-invasive population screening and lays foundations for personalized therapy. In this study, two commercially available platforms, Roche's Avenio ctDNA Expanded panel and QIAgen's QIAseq Human Comprehensive Cancer panel were compared for (1) panel coverage of clinically relevant variants; (2) target enrichment specificity and sequencing performance; (3) the sensitivity; (4) concordance and (5) sequencing coverage using the same human blood sample with ultra-deep next-generation sequencing. Our finding suggests that Avenio detected somatic mutations in common cancers in over 70% of patients while QIAseq covered nearly 90% with a higher average number of variants per patient (Avenio: 3; QIAseq: 8 variants per patient). Both panels demonstrated similar on-target rate and percentage of reads mapped. However, Avenio had more uniform sequencing coverage across regions with different GC content. Avenio had a higher sensitivity and concordance compared with QIAseq at the same sequencing depth. This study identifies a unique niche for the application of each of the panel and allows the scientific community to make an informed decision on the technologies to meet research or application needs.
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.