Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41123648›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of hematology2025

Evaluation of reference sample type for somatic variant calling in myeloid cancers.

Maja Z Jakobsen, Emil-August Torp, Issa I Issa, Helle Høholt, Mads Sønderkaer, Jakob Madsen, Lisa-Maj Christensen, Maren P Jørgensen, Anne K Nøhr, Rasmus F Brøndum and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05695638 (Proseq Cancer), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05695638 recruitingnot on this map

Proseq Cancer: A Prospective Study of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in Patients With Incurable Cancer in Search for Targeted Treatment

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorMorten LadekarlRan2020 to 2035Enrolled3,000ConditionsSolid Tumor, Unspecified, Adult, Haematological Malignancy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Maja Z JakobsenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Emil-August TorpCenter for Clinical Data Science (CLINDA), Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University & Research, Education and Innovation, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Issa I IssaDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Helle HøholtDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Mads SønderkaerDepartment of Molecular Diagnostics, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Jakob MadsenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Lisa-Maj ChristensenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Maren P JørgensenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Anne K NøhrCenter for Clinical Data Science (CLINDA), Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University & Research, Education and Innovation, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Rasmus F BrøndumCenter for Clinical Data Science (CLINDA), Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University & Research, Education and Innovation, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Daniel T KristensenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Karen DybkaerDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Marianne T SeverinsenDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
Hanne DueDepartment of Hematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Søndre Skovvej 15, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark. hanne.rasmussen@rn.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0567-9967

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-throughput sequencing is transforming cancer diagnostics, research, and clinical decision-making, yet accurate identification of disease-driving somatic variants often requires comparing tumor and normal DNA. This study aimed to identify the optimal normal reference sample for whole exome sequencing (WES) in myeloid-derived cancers. T-cells, skin biopsies, saliva, and a tumor-only analysis were evaluated by comparing variant calls from tumor-reference pair to those from tumor-fibroblast analyses. T-cells demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.91-1.00) and lowest false positive rate, establishing them as a reliable reference option. Skin biopsies and saliva yielded inconsistent results, likely due to leucocytic contamination. While tumor-only analysis offered high sensitivity, it generated numerous false positives; however, a selective filtration strategy provides a feasible solution by omitting the need for a normal reference sample. These findings suggest T-cells are the optimal balance of accuracy and practicality for identifying somatic variants in myeloid cancers, while tumor-only analysis presents a viable alternative with careful filtering. This improved workflow supports efficient and reliable genomic profiling for personalized treatment decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov, TRN: NCT05695638, Registration date: 10 January 2023.

Indexed as

Exome SequencingFemaleHumansMaleSalivaT-LymphocytesClinical hematologyMyeloid cancersPrecision medicineSomatic variant callingWhole exome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID41123648
PMCPMC12672828

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.