These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

599 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24086590)

  • 1. Variant callers for next-generation sequencing data: a comparison study.
    Liu X; Han S; Wang Z; Gelernter J; Yang BZ
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(9):e75619. PubMed ID: 24086590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Impact of post-alignment processing in variant discovery from whole exome data.
    Tian S; Yan H; Kalmbach M; Slager SL
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Oct; 17(1):403. PubMed ID: 27716037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Performance assessment of variant calling pipelines using human whole exome sequencing and simulated data.
    Kumaran M; Subramanian U; Devarajan B
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2019 Jun; 20(1):342. PubMed ID: 31208315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Benchmarking variant callers in next-generation and third-generation sequencing analysis.
    Pei S; Liu T; Ren X; Li W; Chen C; Xie Z
    Brief Bioinform; 2021 May; 22(3):. PubMed ID: 32698196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Systematic comparison of variant calling pipelines using gold standard personal exome variants.
    Hwang S; Kim E; Lee I; Marcotte EM
    Sci Rep; 2015 Dec; 5():17875. PubMed ID: 26639839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Systematic benchmark of state-of-the-art variant calling pipelines identifies major factors affecting accuracy of coding sequence variant discovery.
    Barbitoff YA; Abasov R; Tvorogova VE; Glotov AS; Predeus AV
    BMC Genomics; 2022 Feb; 23(1):155. PubMed ID: 35193511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Challenges in exome analysis by LifeScope and its alternative computational pipelines.
    Pranckevičiene E; Rančelis T; Pranculis A; Kučinskas V
    BMC Res Notes; 2015 Sep; 8():421. PubMed ID: 26346699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of GATK and DeepVariant by trio sequencing.
    Lin YL; Chang PC; Hsu C; Hung MZ; Chien YH; Hwu WL; Lai F; Lee NC
    Sci Rep; 2022 Feb; 12(1):1809. PubMed ID: 35110657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Validation and assessment of variant calling pipelines for next-generation sequencing.
    Pirooznia M; Kramer M; Parla J; Goes FS; Potash JB; McCombie WR; Zandi PP
    Hum Genomics; 2014 Jul; 8(1):14. PubMed ID: 25078893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. From Wet-Lab to Variations: Concordance and Speed of Bioinformatics Pipelines for Whole Genome and Whole Exome Sequencing.
    Laurie S; Fernandez-Callejo M; Marco-Sola S; Trotta JR; Camps J; Chacón A; Espinosa A; Gut M; Gut I; Heath S; Beltran S
    Hum Mutat; 2016 Dec; 37(12):1263-1271. PubMed ID: 27604516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of seven SNP calling pipelines for the next-generation sequencing data of chickens.
    Liu J; Shen Q; Bao H
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(1):e0262574. PubMed ID: 35100292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. VariantMetaCaller: automated fusion of variant calling pipelines for quantitative, precision-based filtering.
    Gézsi A; Bolgár B; Marx P; Sarkozy P; Szalai C; Antal P
    BMC Genomics; 2015 Oct; 16():875. PubMed ID: 26510841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detailed simulation of cancer exome sequencing data reveals differences and common limitations of variant callers.
    Hofmann AL; Behr J; Singer J; Kuipers J; Beisel C; Schraml P; Moch H; Beerenwinkel N
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2017 Jan; 18(1):8. PubMed ID: 28049408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison among three variant callers and assessment of the accuracy of imputation from SNP array data to whole-genome sequence level in chicken.
    Ni G; Strom TM; Pausch H; Reimer C; Preisinger R; Simianer H; Erbe M
    BMC Genomics; 2015 Oct; 16():824. PubMed ID: 26486989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performance evaluation of pipelines for mapping, variant calling and interval padding, for the analysis of NGS germline panels.
    Zanti M; Michailidou K; Loizidou MA; Machattou C; Pirpa P; Christodoulou K; Spyrou GM; Kyriacou K; Hadjisavvas A
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Apr; 22(1):218. PubMed ID: 33910496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An analytical workflow for accurate variant discovery in highly divergent regions.
    Tian S; Yan H; Neuhauser C; Slager SL
    BMC Genomics; 2016 Sep; 17(1):703. PubMed ID: 27590916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A study on fast calling variants from next-generation sequencing data using decision tree.
    Li Z; Wang Y; Wang F
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2018 Apr; 19(1):145. PubMed ID: 29673316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Consensus Genotyper for Exome Sequencing (CGES): improving the quality of exome variant genotypes.
    Trubetskoy V; Rodriguez A; Dave U; Campbell N; Crawford EL; Cook EH; Sutcliffe JS; Foster I; Madduri R; Cox NJ; Davis LK
    Bioinformatics; 2015 Jan; 31(2):187-93. PubMed ID: 25270638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Low concordance of multiple variant-calling pipelines: practical implications for exome and genome sequencing.
    O'Rawe J; Jiang T; Sun G; Wu Y; Wang W; Hu J; Bodily P; Tian L; Hakonarson H; Johnson WE; Wei Z; Wang K; Lyon GJ
    Genome Med; 2013; 5(3):28. PubMed ID: 23537139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing single nucleotide variant detection and genotype calling on whole-genome sequenced individuals.
    Cheng AY; Teo YY; Ong RT
    Bioinformatics; 2014 Jun; 30(12):1707-13. PubMed ID: 24558117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.