ArticleHuman immunology2020
Concordance between predicted HLA type using next generation sequencing data generated for non-HLA purposes and clinical HLA type.
Article in Human immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Functional Status of Human Leukocyte Antigen Class I Genes in Cancer Tissues in the Context of Personalized Neoantigen Peptide Vaccine Immunotherapy.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) Testing in Pharmacogenomics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Liver mesenchymal stem cells are superior inhibitors of NK cell functions through differences in their secretome compared to other mesenchymal stem cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Pharmacogenomics education, research and clinical implementation in the state of Minnesota.Pharmacogenomics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We explored the feasibility of obtaining accurate HLA type using pre-existing NGS data not generated for HLA purposes. 83 exomes and 500 targeted NGS pharmacogenomic panels were analyzed using Omixon HLA Explore, OptiType, and/or HLA-Genotyper software. Results were compared against clinical HLA genotyping. 765 (94.2%) Omixon and 769 (94.7%) HLA-Genotyper of 812 germline allele calls across class I/II loci and 402 (99.5%) of 404 OptiType class I calls were concordant to the second field (i.e. HLA-A*02:01). An additional 19 (2.3%) Omixon, 39 (4.8%) HLA-Genotyper, and 2 (0.5%) OptiType allele calls were first field concordant (i.e. HLA-A*02). Using Omixon, four alleles (0.4%) were discordant and 24 (3.0%) failed to call, while 4 alleles (0.4%) were discordant using HLA-Genotyper. Tumor exomes were also evaluated and were 85.4%, 91.6%, and 100% concordant (Omixon and HLA-Genotyper with 96 alleles tested, and Optitype with 48 class I alleles, respectively). The 15 exomes and 500 pharmacogenomic panels were 100% concordant for each pharmacogenomic allele tested. This work has broad implications spanning future clinical care (pharmacogenomics, tumor response to immunotherapy, autoimmunity, etc.) and research applications.
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.