ArticleGenes2022
Evaluation of the Available Variant Calling Tools for Oxford Nanopore Sequencing in Breast Cancer.
Article in Genes, 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.
- Long-range PCRs and next-generation sequencing to detect cytomegalovirus drug resistance-associated mutations.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Evaluation of long-read sequencing for Ostreid herpesvirus type 1 genome characterization fromMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Leveraging long-read sequencing technologies for pharmacogenomic testing: applications, analytical strategies, challenges, and future perspectives.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Review
- Benchmarking of bioinformatics tools for the hybridComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Best Practices in Microbial Experimental Evolution: Using Reporters and Long-Read Sequencing to Identify Copy Number Variation in Experimental Evolution.Journal of molecular evolution · 2023Review
- Evaluation of the diagnostic utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing testing for pathogen identification in infected hosts: a retrospective cohort study.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
- HapAsmbl: A reference-aided pipeline for assembling haplotypes in Nanopore amplicon sequence data of polymorphic populations.Applications in plant sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of biomarker testing, in the field of personalized medicine, is to guide treatments to achieve the best possible results for each patient. The accurate and reliable identification of everyone's genome variants is essential for the success of clinical genomics, employing third-generation sequencing. Different variant calling techniques have been used and recommended by both Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) and Nanopore communities. A thorough examination of the variant callers might give critical guidance for third-generation sequencing-based clinical genomics. In this study, two reference genome sample datasets (NA12878) and (NA24385) and the set of high-confidence variant calls provided by the Genome in a Bottle (GIAB) were used to allow the evaluation of the performance of six variant calling tools, including Human-SNP-wf, Clair3, Clair, NanoCaller, Longshot, and Medaka, as an integral step in the in-house variant detection workflow. Out of the six variant callers understudy, Clair3 and Human-SNP-wf that has Clair3 incorporated into it achieved the highest performance rates in comparison to the other variant callers. Evaluation of the results for the tool was expressed in terms of Precision, Recall, and F1-score using Hap.py tools for the comparison. In conclusion, our findings give important insights for identifying accurate variants from third-generation sequencing of personal genomes using different variant detection tools available for long-read sequencing.
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.