ArticleGenome biology2026
Assessment of nanopore RNA modification calling in human cell lines and synthetic systems.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of RNA modifications in cancer translational control.RNA biology · 2026Review
- Review
- Toward a comprehensive modification landscape of yeast mitochondrial tRNAs using Nanopore direct RNA sequencing and dihydrouridine sequencing.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Genomic in vitro transcription and Nanopore direct RNA sequencing of a human B-Lymphocyte cell line.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Integrating mass spectrometry with Nanopore direct RNA sequencing forbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Assessment of nanopore RNA modification calling in human cell lines and synthetic systems.Genome biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNanopore technology enables the direct sequencing of intact RNA molecules allowing for the detection of native chemical modifications. In 2024, Oxford Nanopore Technologies updated direct RNA sequencing from RNA002 to RNA004 platform as well as releasing an improved basecaller (Dorado) capable of de novo detection of eight RNA modifications. We compare RNA002 and RNA004 platforms for poly(A) RNA from GM12878 and HEK293 cell lines and evaluate Dorado-based RNA modification calling.
resultsWe compute U-to-C mismatches, previously used to identify putative pseudouridine sites, and run m6anet for identifying putative N6-methyladenosine sites. We find that Dorado identifies global and site-specific differences when compared to RNA002 methods. We examine eight RNA modifications detected by Dorado for Nanopore direct RNA sequencing data and propose an analysis strategy for curating RNA modification predictions, including thresholds for read coverage and modification occupancy, canonical RNA-based false positive correction, and comparison with orthogonal information. When comparing modification sites called by Dorado versus those documented by orthogonal datasets, we note significant discordance and we document disagreements between our results and orthogonal datasets.
conclusionsThe transition from RNA002 to RNA004 substantially improves sequencing accuracy and modification calling. However, Nanopore direct RNA sequencing-based RNA modification detection requires careful validation. We recommend combining Nanopore direct RNA sequencing with orthogonal methods and appropriate filtering strategies for increased confidence in modification calls.
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.