ArticleFrontiers in genetics2023
Systematic comparison of variant calling pipelines of target genome sequencing cross multiple next-generation sequencers.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- ClinicalFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Harnessing cuproptosis: a new avenue for targeted cancer therapies.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2025Review
- The Role of Somatic Mutation in Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia Pathogenesis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparative evaluation of four exome enrichment solutions in 2024: Agilent, Roche, Vazyme and Nanodigmbio.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Spatial transcriptomics in cancer research and potential clinical impact: a narrative review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Targeted genomic sequencing (TS) greatly benefits precision oncology by rapidly detecting genetic variations with better accuracy and sensitivity owing to its high sequencing depth. Multiple sequencing platforms and variant calling tools are available for TS, making it excruciating for researchers to choose. Therefore, benchmarking study across different platforms and pipelines available for TS is imperative. In this study, we performed a TS of Reference OncoSpan FFPE (HD832) sample enriched by TSO500 panel using four commercially available sequencers, and analyzed the output 50 datasets using five commonly-used bioinformatics pipelines. We systematically investigated the sequencing quality and variant detection sensitivity, expecting to provide optimal recommendations for future research. Four sequencing platforms returned highly concordant results in terms of base quality (Q20 > 94%), sequencing coverage (>97%) and depth (>2000×). Benchmarking revealed good concordance of variant calling across different platforms and pipelines, among which, FASTASeq 300 platform showed the highest sensitivity (100%) and precision (100%) in high-confidence variants calling when analyzed by SNVer and VarScan 2 algorithms. Furthermore, this sequencer demonstrated the shortest sequencing time (∼21 h) at the sequencing mode PE150. Through the intersection of 50 datasets generated in this study, we recommended a novel set of variant genes outside the truth set published by HD832, expecting to replenish HD832 for future research on tumor variant diagnosis. Besides, we applied these five tools to another panel (TargetSeq One) for Twist cfDNA Pan-cancer Reference Standard, comprehensive consideration of SNP and InDel sensitivity, SNVer and VarScan 2 performed best among them. Furthermore, SNVer and VarScan 2 also performed best for six cancer cell lines samples regarding SNP and InDel sensitivity. Considering the dissimilarity of variant calls across different pipelines for datasets from the same platform, we recommended an integration of multiple tools to improve variant calling sensitivity and accuracy for the cancer genome. Illumina and GeneMind technologies can be used independently or together by public health laboratories performing tumor TS. SNVer and VarScan 2 perform better regarding variant detection sensitivity for three typical tumor samples. Our study provides a standardized target sequencing resource to benchmark new bioinformatics protocols and sequencing platforms.
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.