ArticleBiology methods & protocols2022
Prediction of risk-associated genes and high-risk liver cancer patients from their mutation profile: benchmarking of mutation calling techniques.
Article in Biology methods & protocols, 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.
- Synchronous endometrial/cervical and ovarian/fallopian tube carcinoma: a genome-wide mutation analysis.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2025Article
- Role of telomere maintenance genes as a predictive biomarker for colorectal cancer immunotherapy response and prognosis.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2025Article
- Identification of novel diagnostic biomarkers associated with liver metastasis in colon adenocarcinoma by machine learning.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- From Samples to Germline and Somatic Sequence Variation: A Focus on Next-Generation Sequencing in Melanoma Research.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identification of somatic mutations with high precision is one of the major challenges in the prediction of high-risk liver cancer patients. In the past, number of mutations calling techniques has been developed that include MuTect2, MuSE, Varscan2, and SomaticSniper. In this study, an attempt has been made to benchmark the potential of these techniques in predicting the prognostic biomarkers for liver cancer. Initially, we extracted somatic mutations in liver cancer patients using Variant Call Format (VCF) and Mutation Annotation Format (MAF) files from the cancer genome atlas. In terms of size, the MAF files are 42 times smaller than VCF files and containing only high-quality somatic mutations. Furthermore, machine learning-based models have been developed for predicting high-risk cancer patients using mutations obtained from different techniques. The performance of different techniques and data files has been compared based on their potential to discriminate high- and low-risk liver cancer patients. Based on correlation analysis, we selected 80 genes having significant negative correlation with the overall survival of liver cancer patients. The univariate survival analysis revealed the prognostic role of highly mutated genes. Single gene-based analysis showed that MuTect2 technique-based MAF file has achieved maximum hazard ratio (HR
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.