ArticleBioinformatics advances2026
Optimizing bioinformatic workflows to extract clinically usable gene expression data from targeted tumor RNA sequencing panels: comparison with total RNA-seq in cancer samples.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Targeted RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is widely used to detect gene fusions in tumors but clinical use of expression data from panels in fusion-negative cases has been limited. Differential gene expression (DGE) profiling from these panels has the potential to improve tumor classification. Results: To facilitate this application, we compared methods for sequence read counting, gene normalization, and supervised and unsupervised clustering methods to optimize them for smaller gene sets. We derived DGE data from ∼200-gene RNA-seq fusion panels. Among five tools for read counting, featureCounts was the most rapid and robust. For DGE with DESeq2, we compared five normalization strategies and showed the five most stably expressed genes over multiple sets provided optimal centralization. The outputs of the optimized pipeline were then assessed by a newly constructed targeted panel that added a limited number of genes assessing cell lineage and tumor grade. Finally, the optimized pipeline was evaluated using mean centroid and principal component analysis and pathway analysis and compared to outputs from full RNA-seq on a common set of challenging tumors. Comparable tumor clustering was observed with RNA-seq and the redesigned targeted gene panel. Availability and implementation: The data analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
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.