ArticlePloS one2022
Development and evaluation of ActSeq: A targeted next-generation sequencing panel for clinical oncology use.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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.
- HPV, HBV, and HIV-1 Viral Integration Site Mapping: A Streamlined Workflow from NGS to Genomic Insights of Carcinogenesis.Viruses · 2024Article
- From haystack to high precision: advanced sequencing methods to unraveling circulating tumor DNA mutations.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Review
- Systematic comparison of variant calling pipelines of target genome sequencing cross multiple next-generation sequencers.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Molecular profiling of male breast cancer by multigene panel testing: Implications for precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe demand for high-throughput genetic profiling of somatic mutations in cancer tissues is growing. We sought to establish a targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) panel test for clinical oncology practice.
methodsCustomized probes were designed to capture exonic regions of 141 genes selected for the panel, which was aimed for the detection of clinically actionable genetic variations in cancer, including KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, ALK, ROS1, KIT and EGFR. The size of entire targeted regions is 0.8 Mb. Library preparation used NEBNext Ultra II FS kit coupled with target enrichment. Paired-end sequencing was run on Illumina NextSeq 500 at a read length of 150 nt. A bioinformatics workflow focusing on single nucleotide variant and short insertions and deletions (SNV/indel) discovery was established using open source, in-house and commercial software tools. Standard reference DNA samples were used in testing the sensitivity and precision and limit of detection in variant calling.
resultsThe general performance of the panel was observed in pilot runs. Average total reads per sample ranged from 30 million to 48 million, 73% ~82% unique reads. All runs had more than 99% average mapping rate. Mean target coverage ranged from 727x to 879x. Depth of coverage at 50x or more reached 87% of targeted region and 60% of targeted region received 500x or more coverage depth. Using OncoSpan HD827 DNA, which bears 144 variants (SNV/indel) from 80 genes that are within the targeted region on the panel, our somatic variant calling pipeline reached 97% sensitivity and 100% precision respectively, with near 48 million reads. High concordance with orthogonal approaches in variant detection was further verified with 7 cancer cell lines and 45 clinical specimens.
conclusionWe developed a NGS panel with a focus on clinically actionable gene mutations and validated the performance in library construction, sequencing and variant calling. High concordance with reference materials and orthogonal mutation detection was observed.
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.