ArticleJournal of advanced research2023
Consistency and reproducibility of large panel next-generation sequencing: Multi-laboratory assessment of somatic mutation detection on reference materials with mismatch repair and proofreading deficiency.
Article in Journal of advanced research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical harm from failure to deploy personalized medicine for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma in the Genomics Era: Current Applications, Challenges and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Reference Materials for Improving Reliability of Multiomics Profiling.Phenomics (Cham, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Enhancing the quality of panel-based tumor mutation burden assessment: a comprehensive study of real-world and in-silico outcomes.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClinical precision oncology increasingly relies on accurate genome-wide profiling using large panel next generation sequencing; however, difficulties in accurate and consistent detection of somatic mutation from individual platforms and pipelines remain an open question.
objectivesTo obtain paired tumor-normal reference materials that can be effectively constructed and interchangeable with clinical samples, and evaluate the performance of 56 panels under routine testing conditions based on the reference samples.
methodsGenes involved in mismatch repair and DNA proofreading were knocked down using the CRISPR-Cas9 technology to accumulate somatic mutations in a defined GM12878 cell line. They were used as reference materials to comprehensively evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of detection results of oncopanels and explore the potential influencing factors.
resultsIn total, 14 paired tumor-normal reference DNA samples from engineered cell lines were prepared, and a reference dataset comprising 168 somatic mutations in a high-confidence region of 1.8 Mb were generated. For mutations with an allele frequency (AF) of more than 5% in reference samples, 56 panels collectively reported 1306 errors, including 729 false negatives (FNs), 179 false positives (FPs) and 398 reproducibility errors. The performance metric varied among panels with precision and recall ranging from 0.773 to 1 and 0.683 to 1, respectively. Incorrect and inadequate filtering accounted for a large proportion of false discovery (including FNs and FPs), while low-quality detection, cross-contamination and other sequencing errors during the wet bench process were other sources of FNs and FPs. In addition, low AF (<5%) considerably influenced the reproducibility and comparability among panels.
conclusionsThis study provided an integrated practice for developing reference standard to assess oncopanels in detecting somatic mutations and quantitatively revealed the source of detection errors. It will promote optimization, validation, and quality control among laboratories with potential applicability in clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.