Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40702511›Full record

ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2025

Comparative analysis of hybrid-SNP microarray and nanopore sequencing for detection of large-sized copy number variants in the human genome.

Catarina Silva, José Ferrão, Bárbara Marques, Sónia Pedro, Hildeberto Correia, Ana Valente, António Sebastião Rodrigues, Luís Vieira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Catarina SilvaTechnology and Innovation Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0864-2572
José FerrãoTechnology and Innovation Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2553-7467
Bárbara MarquesCytogenetics Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4392-4858
Sónia PedroCytogenetics Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.
Hildeberto CorreiaCytogenetics Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0472-2209
Ana ValenteResearch and Development Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-7332-8643
António Sebastião RodriguesComprehensive Health Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo Dos Mártires da Pátria, 130, 1169-056, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8139-4595
Luís VieiraTechnology and Innovation Unit, Human Genetics Department, National Institute of Health, Avenida Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisbon, Portugal. luis.vieira@insa.min-saude.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-1409

Funding

Centre for Toxicogenomics and Human Health -ToxOmics UID/BIM/00009/2019GenomePT project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-022184
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNanopore sequencing is a technology that holds great promise for identifying all types of human genome variations, particularly structural variations. In this work, we used nanopore sequencing technology to sequence 2 human cell lines at low depth of coverage to call copy number variations (CNV), and compared the results variant by variant with chromosomal microarray (CMA) results.

resultsWe analysed sequencing data using CuteSV and Sniffles2 variant callers, compared breakpoints based on hybrid-SNP microarray, nanopore sequencing and Sanger sequencing, and analysed CNV coverage. From a total of 48 high confidence variants (truth set), variant calling detected 79% of the truth set variants, increasing to 86% for interstitial CNV. Simultaneous use of the 2 callers slightly increased variant calling. Both callers performed better when calling CNV losses than gains. Variant sizes from CMA and nanopore sequencing showed an excellent correlation, with breakpoints determined by nanopore sequencing differing by only 20 base pairs on average from Sanger sequencing. Nanopore sequencing also revealed that four variants concealed genomic inversions undetectable by CMA. In the 10 CNV not called in nanopore sequencing, 8 showed coverage evidence of genomic loss or gain, highlighting the need to improve SV calling algorithms performance.

conclusionsNanopore sequencing offers advantages over CMA for structural variant detection, including the identification of multiple variant types and their breakpoints with increased precision. However, further improvements in variant calling algorithms are still needed for nanopore sequencing to become a highly robust and standardized approach for a comprehensive analysis of genomic structural variation.

Indexed as

Copy number variationHybrid-SNP microarrayNanopore SequencingStructural variationThird-generation sequencingVariant callingWhole genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID40702511
PMCPMC12288236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.