ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2025
A systematic analysis of contemporary whole exome sequencing capture kits to optimise high-coverage capture of CCDS regions.
Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Practical Workflow for Correcting Kit-Specific Effects in Whole-Exome Sequencing Data.Methods and protocols · 2026Article
- Comparison of Whole Exome Sequencing Commercial Kits Performance Across Diverse Tissue Sources.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Optimization of a hybridization-based target enrichment protocol for precision oncology.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whole exome sequencing (WES) is a well-established tool for clinical diagnostics, is more cost-effective and faster to analyse than whole genome sequencing and has been implemented to uplift diagnostic rates in human disease. However, challenges remain to achieve comprehensive and uniform coverage of targets, and high sensitivity and specificity. Differences in genomic target regions and exome capture mechanism between kits may lead to differences in overall coverage uniformity and capture efficiency. Here, we analyse the efficiency of a range of off-the-shelf exome sequencing (ES) kits in capturing their reported targets and the consensus coding sequence (CCDS) regions. Our results show Twist Custom Exome, Twist Human Comprehensive Exome, and Roche KAPA HyperExome V1 perform particularly well at capturing their target regions at 10X and 20X coverage and achieve the highest capture efficiency of CCDS regions upon read downsampling. This was the case despite both Twist kits targeting less than 37Mb in the genome. Our analysis highlights the impact of kit target design on capture efficiency in WES, with kit target size and uniformity of coverage impacting the capture efficiency of CCDS regions. This benchmark will help researchers to make an informed decision based on their needs.
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.