ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2025
Benchmarking Ploidy Estimation Methods for Bulk and Single-Cell Whole Genome Sequencing.
Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 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.
- Aneuploidy in exfoliated buccal cells: mechanisms, methods, and future perspectives.Mutagenesis · 2026Review
- Benchmarking Ploidy Estimation Methods for Bulk and Single-Cell Whole Genome Sequencing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Maintaining cellular ploidy is critical for normal physiological processes, although gains in ploidy are frequently observed during development, tissue regeneration, and metabolism, and potentially contribute to aneuploidy, thereby promoting tumor evolution. Although numerous computational tools have been developed to estimate cellular ploidy from whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data at bulk or single-cell resolution, to the knowledge, no systematic comparison of their performance has been conducted. Here, a benchmarking study is presented of 11 methods for bulk WGS and 8 methods for single-cell WGS data, utilizing both experimental and simulated datasets derived from diploid cells mixed with aneuploid or polyploid cells. For bulk WGS tools, their performance is evaluated in estimating tumor purity and ploidy, as well as the influence of preprocessing steps, somatic mutation callers, purity, sequencing platforms, and depths. It is found that PURPLE outperforms other methods when tumor purity exceeded 30%, regardless of sequencing coverage or platform. However, all existing tools performed poorly applied to euploid samples or long-read sequencing data. For single-cell WGS tools, their ploidy detection accuracy is assessed, and SeCNV is identified as the top-performing method. These findings provide valuable guidance for future research on ploidy analysis and ongoing improvements in computational tools for single-cell sequencing data.
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.