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 *

635 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25078893)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 8. Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing.
    Yao Z; You FM; N'Diaye A; Knox RE; McCartney C; Hiebert CW; Pozniak C; Xu W
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2020 Aug; 21(1):360. PubMed ID: 32807073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. tarSVM: Improving the accuracy of variant calls derived from microfluidic PCR-based targeted next generation sequencing using a support vector machine.
    Gillies CE; Otto EA; Vega-Warner V; Robertson CC; Sanna-Cherchi S; Gharavi A; Crawford B; Bhimma R; Winkler C; ; ; Kang HM; Sampson MG
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Jun; 17(1):233. PubMed ID: 27287006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of an optimized germline exomes pipeline using BWA-MEM2 and Dragen-GATK tools.
    Alganmi N; Abusamra H
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(8):e0288371. PubMed ID: 37535628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Detailed comparison of two popular variant calling packages for exome and targeted exon studies.
    Warden CD; Adamson AW; Neuhausen SL; Wu X
    PeerJ; 2014; 2():e600. PubMed ID: 25289185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Halvade somatic: Somatic variant calling with Apache Spark.
    Decap D; de Schaetzen van Brienen L; Larmuseau M; Costanza P; Herzeel C; Wuyts R; Marchal K; Fostier J
    Gigascience; 2022 Jan; 11(1):. PubMed ID: 35022699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Comparison of sequencing data processing pipelines and application to underrepresented African human populations.
    Breton G; Johansson ACV; Sjödin P; Schlebusch CM; Jakobsson M
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Oct; 22(1):488. PubMed ID: 34627144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. PhredEM: a phred-score-informed genotype-calling approach for next-generation sequencing studies.
    Liao P; Satten GA; Hu YJ
    Genet Epidemiol; 2017 Jul; 41(5):375-387. PubMed ID: 28560825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. MutAid: Sanger and NGS Based Integrated Pipeline for Mutation Identification, Validation and Annotation in Human Molecular Genetics.
    Pandey RV; Pabinger S; Kriegner A; Weinhäusel A
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0147697. PubMed ID: 26840129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. GATK hard filtering: tunable parameters to improve variant calling for next generation sequencing targeted gene panel data.
    De Summa S; Malerba G; Pinto R; Mori A; Mijatovic V; Tommasi S
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2017 Mar; 18(Suppl 5):119. PubMed ID: 28361668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Systematic comparison of germline variant calling pipelines cross multiple next-generation sequencers.
    Chen J; Li X; Zhong H; Meng Y; Du H
    Sci Rep; 2019 Jun; 9(1):9345. PubMed ID: 31249349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 32.