Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34744167›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2022

Combining callers improves the detection of copy number variants from whole-genome sequencing.

Marie Coutelier, Manuel Holtgrewe, Marten Jäger, Ricarda Flöttman, Martin A Mensah, Malte Spielmann, Peter Krawitz, Denise Horn, Dieter Beule, Stefan Mundlos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Genetic analysis of neurodegenerative diseases.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Genome-wide association testing beyond SNPs.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marie CoutelierInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0261-7210
Manuel Holtgrewe *Core Unit Bioinformatics, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Marten Jäger *Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ricarda FlöttmanInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Martin A MensahInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8080-8779
Malte SpielmannInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Peter KrawitzInstitut für Genomische Statistik und Bioinformatik, Bonn, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3194-8625
Denise HornInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Dieter BeuleCore Unit Bioinformatics, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Stefan MundlosInstitute of Medical and Human Genetics, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. stefan.mundlos@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9788-3166

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Copy Number Variants (CNVs) are deletions, duplications or insertions larger than 50 base pairs. They account for a large percentage of the normal genome variation and play major roles in human pathology. While array-based approaches have long been used to detect them in clinical practice, whole-genome sequencing (WGS) bears the promise to allow concomitant exploration of CNVs and smaller variants. However, accurately calling CNVs from WGS remains a difficult computational task, for which a consensus is still lacking. In this paper, we explore practical calling options to reach the best compromise between sensitivity and sensibility. We show that callers based on different signal (paired-end reads, split reads, coverage depth) yield complementary results. We suggest approaches combining four selected callers (Manta, Delly, ERDS, CNVnator) and a regenotyping tool (SV2), and show that this is applicable in everyday practice in terms of computation time and further interpretation. We demonstrate the superiority of these approaches over array-based Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH), specifically regarding the lack of resolution in breakpoint definition and the detection of potentially relevant CNVs. Finally, we confirm our results on the NA12878 benchmark genome, as well as one clinically validated sample. In conclusion, we suggest that WGS constitutes a timely and economically valid alternative to the combination of aCGH and whole-exome sequencing.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsGenome, HumanComparative Genomic HybridizationExome SequencingHumansWhole Genome Sequencing

Identifiers

PMID34744167
PMCPMC8821561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.