ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2023
Toward the functional interpretation of somatic structural variations: bulk- and single-cell approaches.
Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. 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.
- Structure Variations and 3D Genome Disruption: Implications in Safety of hPSC-Based Cell Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Replication stress increases de novo CNVs across the malaria parasite genome.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Replication stress increases de novo CNVs across the malaria parasite genome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Review
- Benchmarking long-read structural variant calling tools and combinations for detecting somatic variants in cancer genomes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Best practices for germline variant and DNA methylation analysis of second- and third-generation sequencing data.Human genomics · 2024Review
- The axis of tumor-associated macrophages, extracellular matrix proteins, and cancer-associated fibroblasts in oncogenesis.Cancer cell international · 2024Review
- Article
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
Structural variants (SVs) are genomic rearrangements that can take many different forms such as copy number alterations, inversions and translocations. During cell development and aging, somatic SVs accumulate in the genome with potentially neutral, deleterious or pathological effects. Generation of somatic SVs is a key mutational process in cancer development and progression. Despite their importance, the detection of somatic SVs is challenging, making them less studied than somatic single-nucleotide variants. In this review, we summarize recent advances in whole-genome sequencing (WGS)-based approaches for detecting somatic SVs at the tissue and single-cell levels and discuss their advantages and limitations. First, we describe the state-of-the-art computational algorithms for somatic SV calling using bulk WGS data and compare the performance of somatic SV detectors in the presence or absence of a matched-normal control. We then discuss the unique features of cutting-edge single-cell-based techniques for analyzing somatic SVs. The advantages and disadvantages of bulk and single-cell approaches are highlighted, along with a discussion of their sensitivity to copy-neutral SVs, usefulness for functional inferences and experimental and computational costs. Finally, computational approaches for linking somatic SVs to their functional readouts, such as those obtained from single-cell transcriptome and epigenome analyses, are illustrated, with a discussion of the promise of these approaches in health and diseases.
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.