ArticlePloS one2021
Multisite verification of the accuracy of a multi-gene next generation sequencing panel for detection of mutations and copy number alterations in solid tumours.
Article in PloS one, 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraoperative phlebotomies and bleeding in liver transplantation: a historical cohort study and causal analysis.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2022Trial
- Article
- Real-world application of targeted next-generation sequencing for identifying molecular variants in Asian non-small-cell lung cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Prospects in the application of ultrasensitive chromosomal aneuploidy detection in precancerous lesions of gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Performance Characteristics of Oncomine Focus Assay for Theranostic Analysis of Solid Tumors, A (21-Months) Real-Life Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Cost Savings of Expedited Care with Upfront Next-Generation Sequencing Testing versus Single-Gene Testing among Patients with Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Based on Current Canadian Practices.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Parallel Versus Sequential Testing of Genetic Aberrations for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the Netherlands.JCO precision oncology · 2022Article
- Observational studies: a perpetual quest for a signal among the noise.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2022Article
- Prognostic significance of copy number variation in B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular variants including single nucleotide variants (SNVs), copy number variants (CNVs) and fusions can be detected in the clinical setting using deep targeted sequencing. These assays support low limits of detection using little genomic input material. They are gaining in popularity in clinical laboratories, where sample volumes are limited, and low variant allele fractions may be present. However, data on reproducibility between laboratories is limited. Using a ring study, we evaluated the performance of 7 Ontario laboratories using targeted sequencing panels. All laboratories analysed a series of control and clinical samples for SNVs/CNVs and gene fusions. High concordance was observed across laboratories for measured CNVs and SNVs. Over 97% of SNV calls in clinical samples were detected by all laboratories. Whilst only a single CNV was detected in the clinical samples tested, all laboratories were able to reproducibly report both the variant and copy number. Concordance for information derived from RNA was lower than observed for DNA, due largely to decreased quality metrics associated with the RNA components of the assay, suggesting that the RNA portions of comprehensive NGS assays may be more vulnerable to variations in approach and workflow. Overall the results of this study support the use of the OFA for targeted sequencing for testing of clinical samples and suggest specific internal quality metrics that can be reliable indicators of assay failure. While we believe this evidence can be interpreted to support deep targeted sequencing in general, additional studies should be performed to confirm this.
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.