ArticleBioinformatics advances2025
Benchmarking accelerated next-generation sequencing analysis pipelines.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Next-Generation Sequencing in Cardiovascular Disease: A New Era of Precision Cardiology.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Rapid NGS Analysis on Google Cloud Platform: Performance Benchmark and User Tutorial.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Industry-standard central processing unit (CPU)-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis tools have led to longer runtimes, affecting their utility in time-sensitive clinical practices and population-scale research studies. To address this, researchers have developed accelerated NGS platforms like DRAGEN and Parabricks, which have significantly reduced runtimes-from days to hours. However, these studies have evaluated accelerated platforms independently without sufficiently assessing computational resource usage or thoroughly investigating speedup scalability, a gap our study is designed to address. Results: Corroborating previous studies, accelerated pipelines demonstrated shorter runtimes than CPU-only approaches, with Parabricks-H100 demonstrating the highest speedups, followed by DRAGEN. In mapping, DRAGEN outperformed Parabricks (L4 and A100) and matched H100 speedups. Parabricks (A100 and H100) variant calling demonstrated higher speedups than DRAGEN. Moreover, DRAGEN and Parabricks-H100 mapping showed positive trends in the coverage-based scalability analysis, while other configurations failed to scale effectively. Our profiler analysis provided new insights into the relationships between Parabricks' performances and resource usage patterns, revealing its potential for further improvements. Our findings and cost comparison help researchers select accelerated platforms based on coverage needs, timeframes, and budget, while suggesting optimization strategies. Availability and implementation: Datasets are described in the 'Data availability' section. Our NGS pipelines are available at https://github.com/NAICNO/accelerated_genomics.
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.