ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Improved Mutation Detection in Duplex Sequencing Data with Sample-Specific Error Profiles.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Duplex sequencing enables highly accurate detection of rare somatic mutations, but existing variant callers often rely on protocol-specific heuristics that limit sensitivity, reproducibility, and cross-study comparability. We present DupCaller, a probabilistic variant caller that builds sample-specific error profiles and applies a strand-aware statistical model for mutation detection. Across 50 synthetic datasets, DupCaller identified 1.25-fold more single-base substitutions (SBSs) and 1.41-fold more indels than a state-of-the-art method, while exhibiting equal or better precision. In three duplex-sequenced cell lines treated with aristolochic acid, it recovered expected mutational signatures while detecting 3.5-fold more SBSs and 2.8-fold more indels. In 93 tissue samples-including neurons, cord blood, sperm, saliva, and blood-DupCaller showed consistent gains, detecting 1.21- to 2.7-fold more mutations. Sensitivity scaled with sample duplication rate, yielding approximately 1.5-fold more mutations under optimal conditions and over 3-fold more in low-duplication samples where other tools falter. These results establish DupCaller as a robust and scalable solution for somatic mutation profiling in duplex sequencing across diverse biological and technical contexts.
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.