ArticleHaematologica2021
Comparative analysis of targeted next-generation sequencing panels for the detection of gene mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: an ERIC multi-center study.
Article in Haematologica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical decisions in clonal hematopoiesis: a contemporary review for clinicians.Haematologica · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Precision diagnostics in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Past, present and future.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Towards precision medicine in lymphoid malignancies.Journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- Panel Sequencing for Clinically Oriented Variant Screening and Copy Number Detection in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Measurable residual disease testing in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: hype, hope neither or both?Leukemia · 2021Article
- Validating genomic tools for precision medicine in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: ERIC leads the way.Haematologica · 2021Article
- Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: from molecular pathogenesis to novel therapeutic strategies.Haematologica · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors at 14 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has transitioned from research to clinical routine, yet the comparability of different technologies for mutation profiling remains an open question. We performed a European multicenter (n=6) evaluation of three amplicon-based NGS assays targeting 11 genes recurrently mutated in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Each assay was assessed by two centers using 48 pre-characterized chronic lymphocytic leukemia samples; libraries were sequenced on the Illumina MiSeq instrument and bioinformatics analyses were centralized. Across all centers the median percentage of target reads ≥100x ranged from 94.2- 99.8%. In order to rule out assay-specific technical variability, we first assessed variant calling at the individual assay level i.e., pairwise analysis of variants detected amongst partner centers. After filtering for variants present in the paired normal sample and removal of PCR/sequencing artefacts, the panels achieved 96.2% (Multiplicom), 97.7% (TruSeq) and 90% (HaloPlex) concordance at a variant allele frequency (VAF) >0.5%. Reproducibility was assessed by looking at the inter-laboratory variation in detecting mutations and 107 of 115 (93% concordance) mutations were detected by all six centers, while the remaining eight variants (7%) were undetected by a single center. Notably, 6 of 8 of these variants concerned minor subclonal mutations (VAF <5%). We sought to investigate low-frequency mutations further by using a high-sensitivity assay containing unique molecular identifiers, which confirmed the presence of several minor subclonal mutations. Thus, while amplicon-based approaches can be adopted for somatic mutation detection with VAF >5%, after rigorous validation, the use of unique molecular identifiers may be necessary to reach a higher sensitivity and ensure consistent and accurate detection of low-frequency variants.
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.