ArticleScientific reports2021
Nanopore sequencing approach for immunoglobulin gene analysis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The transformative impact of ultra-rapid nanopore sequencing in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Innovative Single-Cell Sequencing Techniques for B cell Analysis and Their Implications for Rational HIV-1 Vaccine Design.Current HIV research · 2026Review
- Performance of Rapid Clonotyping of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Using Flongle Flow-Cell Nanopore Sequencing of IGH Rearrangements.European journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Nanopore sequencing technology and its applications.MedComm · 2023Review
- Enhancing Molecular Testing for Effective Delivery of Actionable Gene Diagnostics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evaluation of the somatic hypermutation of the clonotypic immunoglobulin heavy variable gene has become essential in the therapeutic management in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients. European Research Initiative on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia promotes good practices and standardized approaches to this assay but often they are labor-intensive, technically complex, with limited in scalability. The use of next-generation sequencing in this analysis has been widely tested, showing comparable accuracy and distinct advantages. However, the adoption of the next generation sequencing requires a high sample number (run batching) to be economically convenient, which could lead to a longer turnaround time. Here we present data from nanopore sequencing for the somatic hypermutation evaluation compared to the standard method. Our results show that nanopore sequencing is suitable for immunoglobulin heavy variable gene mutational analysis in terms of sensitivity, accuracy, simplicity of analysis and is less time-consuming. Moreover, our work showed that the development of an appropriate data analysis pipeline could lower the nanopore sequencing error rate attitude.
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.