ArticleBMC genomics2022
Performance comparison of Agilent new SureSelect All Exon v8 probes with v7 probes for exome sequencing.
Article in BMC genomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Whole Exome Sequencing Commercial Kits Performance Across Diverse Tissue Sources.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- A systematic analysis of contemporary whole exome sequencing capture kits to optimise high-coverage capture of CCDS regions.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of four exome enrichment solutions in 2024: Agilent, Roche, Vazyme and Nanodigmbio.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Case Report: Novel variants in theFrontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Bioinformatics of germline variant discovery for rare disease diagnostics: current approaches and remaining challenges.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Review
- Article
- Twist exome capture allows for lower average sequence coverage in clinical exome sequencing.Human genomics · 2023Article
- Convergent Genetic Architecture in Concurrent Anorectal Malformations and Hypospadias: TheJournal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Exome sequencing is becoming a routine in health care, because it increases the chance of pinpointing the genetic cause of an individual patient's condition and thus making an accurate diagnosis. It is important for facilities providing genetic services to keep track of changes in the technology of exome capture in order to maximize throughput while reducing cost per sample. In this study, we focused on comparing the newly released exome probe set Agilent SureSelect Human All Exon v8 and the previous probe set v7. In preparation for higher throughput of exome sequencing using the DNBSEQ-G400, we evaluated target design, coverage statistics, and variants across these two different exome capture products. Although the target size of the v8 design has not changed much compared to the v7 design (35.24 Mb vs 35.8 Mb), the v8 probe design allows you to call more of SNVs (+ 3.06%) and indels (+ 8.49%) with the same number of raw reads per sample on the common target regions (34.84 Mb). Our results suggest that the new Agilent v8 probe set for exome sequencing yields better data quality than the current Agilent v7 set.
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.