ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Critical assessment of nanopore sequencing for the detection of multiple forms of DNA modifications.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While nanopore sequencing is increasingly used for mapping DNA modifications, it is important to recognize false positive calls as they can mislead biological interpretations. To assist biologists and methods developers, we describe a framework for rigorous evaluation that highlights the use of false discovery rate with rationally designed negative controls capturing both general background and confounding modifications. Our critical assessment across multiple forms of DNA modifications highlights that while nanopore sequencing performs reliably for high-abundance modifications, including 5-methylcytosine (5mC) at CpG sites in mammalian cells and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) in mammalian brain cells, it makes a significant proportion of false positive detections for low-abundance modifications, such as 5mC at CpH sites, 5hmC and N6-methyldeoxyadenine (6mA) in most mammal cell types. This study highlights the urgent need to incorporate this framework in future methods development and biological studies, and advocates prioritizing nanopore sequencing for mapping abundant over rare modifications in biomedical applications.
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.