ArticleGenome biology2026
A systematic benchmark of high-accuracy PacBio long-read RNA sequencing for transcript-level quantification.
Article in Genome biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Long-read proteogenomic atlas of human neuronal differentiation reveals isoform diversity informing neurodevelopmental risk mechanisms.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Nanopore direct RNA sequencing and the epitranscriptome: Advances in mapping native RNA landscapes.iMeta · 2026Review
- A systematic benchmark of high-accuracy PacBio long-read RNA sequencing for transcript-level quantification.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Review
- Long-Read Sequencing Reveals RNA Splicing Complexity in Human Diseases.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Review
- Long-read proteogenomic atlas of human neuronal differentiation reveals isoform diversity informing neurodevelopmental risk mechanisms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe assembly of fragmented RNA-sequencing reads into complete transcripts is error-prone, particularly for genes with complex splicing, resulting in ambiguity in transcript discovery and quantification. PacBio long-read RNA sequencing resolves transcripts with greater clarity than short-read technologies. PacBio Kinnex employs a cDNA concatenation approach that increases read yield on average by 8-fold relative to previous protocols. However, its quantitative performance remains under-evaluated at scale.
resultsHere, we benchmark the high-throughput PacBio Kinnex platform against Illumina short-read RNA-seq using matched, deeply sequenced datasets across a time course of endothelial cell differentiation. Compared to Illumina, Kinnex achieves comparable gene-level quantification and more accurate transcript discovery and transcript quantification. While Illumina detects more transcripts overall, many reflect potentially unstable or ambiguous estimates in complex genes. Kinnex largely avoids these issues, producing more reliable differential transcript expression calls, despite a mild bias against short transcripts (shorter than 1.25 kb). When correcting Illumina for inferential variability, Kinnex and Illumina quantifications are highly concordant, demonstrating equivalent performance. We also benchmark long-read tools, nominating Oarfish as the most efficient for our Kinnex data.
conclusionsTogether, our results establish Kinnex as a reliable platform for full-length transcript quantification.
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.