Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38510277›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2024

Long read sequencing on its way to the routine diagnostics of genetic diseases.

Giulia Olivucci, Emanuela Iovino, Giovanni Innella, Daniela Turchetti, Tommaso Pippucci, Pamela Magini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Spectrum of Hereditary Neuropathies in Adult Patients From Serbia.Journal of the peripheral nervous system : JPNS · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Long-read sequencing for neurological disorders: opportunities, challenges, and future directions.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. <italic>WT1</italic> Deletion in 46,XY DSD: The Importance of Copy Number Variant Analysis.Sexual development : genetics, molecular biology, evolution, endocrinology, embryology, and pathology of sex determination and differentiation · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Giulia OlivucciIRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Emanuela IovinoIRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Giovanni InnellaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Daniela TurchettiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Tommaso PippucciIRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Pamela MaginiMedical Genetics Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical application of technological progress in the identification of DNA alterations has always led to improvements of diagnostic yields in genetic medicine. At chromosome side, from cytogenetic techniques evaluating number and gross structural defects to genomic microarrays detecting cryptic copy number variants, and at molecular level, from Sanger method studying the nucleotide sequence of single genes to the high-throughput next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, resolution and sensitivity progressively increased expanding considerably the range of detectable DNA anomalies and alongside of Mendelian disorders with known genetic causes. However, particular genomic regions (i.e., repetitive and GC-rich sequences) are inefficiently analyzed by standard genetic tests, still relying on laborious, time-consuming and low-sensitive approaches (i.e., southern-blot for repeat expansion or long-PCR for genes with highly homologous pseudogenes), accounting for at least part of the patients with undiagnosed genetic disorders. Third generation sequencing, generating long reads with improved mappability, is more suitable for the detection of structural alterations and defects in hardly accessible genomic regions. Although recently implemented and not yet clinically available, long read sequencing (LRS) technologies have already shown their potential in genetic medicine research that might greatly impact on diagnostic yield and reporting times, through their translation to clinical settings. The main investigated LRS application concerns the identification of structural variants and repeat expansions, probably because techniques for their detection have not evolved as rapidly as those dedicated to single nucleotide variants (SNV) identification: gold standard analyses are karyotyping and microarrays for balanced and unbalanced chromosome rearrangements, respectively, and southern blot and repeat-primed PCR for the amplification and sizing of expanded alleles, impaired by limited resolution and sensitivity that have not been significantly improved by the advent of NGS. Nevertheless, more recently, with the increased accuracy provided by the latest product releases, LRS has been tested also for SNV detection, especially in genes with highly homologous pseudogenes and for haplotype reconstruction to assess the parental origin of alleles with

Indexed as

genetic diseaseslong read sequencingmethylationmolecular diagnosisRNA sequencingsingle nucleotide variantsstructural variantstandem repeats

Identifiers

PMID38510277
PMCPMC10951082

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.