191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30397337)
1. A deep learning approach to automate refinement of somatic variant calling from cancer sequencing data.
Ainscough BJ; Barnell EK; Ronning P; Campbell KM; Wagner AH; Fehniger TA; Dunn GP; Uppaluri R; Govindan R; Rohan TE; Griffith M; Mardis ER; Swamidass SJ; Griffith OL
Nat Genet; 2018 Dec; 50(12):1735-1743. PubMed ID: 30397337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Standard operating procedure for somatic variant refinement of sequencing data with paired tumor and normal samples.
Barnell EK; Ronning P; Campbell KM; Krysiak K; Ainscough BJ; Sheta LM; Pema SP; Schmidt AD; Richters M; Cotto KC; Danos AM; Ramirez C; Skidmore ZL; Spies NC; Hundal J; Sediqzad MS; Kunisaki J; Gomez F; Trani L; Matlock M; Wagner AH; Swamidass SJ; Griffith M; Griffith OL
Genet Med; 2019 Apr; 21(4):972-981. PubMed ID: 30287923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. FIREVAT: finding reliable variants without artifacts in human cancer samples using etiologically relevant mutational signatures.
Kim H; Lee AJ; Lee J; Chun H; Ju YS; Hong D
Genome Med; 2019 Dec; 11(1):81. PubMed ID: 31847917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Accuracy and reproducibility of somatic point mutation calling in clinical-type targeted sequencing data.
Karimnezhad A; Palidwor GA; Thavorn K; Stewart DJ; Campbell PA; Lo B; Perkins TJ
BMC Med Genomics; 2020 Oct; 13(1):156. PubMed ID: 33059707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. SNooPer: a machine learning-based method for somatic variant identification from low-pass next-generation sequencing.
Spinella JF; Mehanna P; Vidal R; Saillour V; Cassart P; Richer C; Ouimet M; Healy J; Sinnett D
BMC Genomics; 2016 Nov; 17(1):912. PubMed ID: 27842494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A computational approach to distinguish somatic vs. germline origin of genomic alterations from deep sequencing of cancer specimens without a matched normal.
Sun JX; He Y; Sanford E; Montesion M; Frampton GM; Vignot S; Soria JC; Ross JS; Miller VA; Stephens PJ; Lipson D; Yelensky R
PLoS Comput Biol; 2018 Feb; 14(2):e1005965. PubMed ID: 29415044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Machine learning random forest for predicting oncosomatic variant NGS analysis.
Pellegrino E; Jacques C; Beaufils N; Nanni I; Carlioz A; Metellus P; Ouafik L
Sci Rep; 2021 Nov; 11(1):21820. PubMed ID: 34750410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Deep convolutional neural networks for accurate somatic mutation detection.
Sahraeian SME; Liu R; Lau B; Podesta K; Mohiyuddin M; Lam HYK
Nat Commun; 2019 Mar; 10(1):1041. PubMed ID: 30833567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Integrated approach to generate artificial samples with low tumor fraction for somatic variant calling benchmarking.
Sergi A; Beltrame L; Marchini S; Masseroli M
BMC Bioinformatics; 2024 May; 25(1):180. PubMed ID: 38720249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Validation of genetic variants from NGS data using deep convolutional neural networks.
Vaisband M; Schubert M; Gassner FJ; Geisberger R; Greil R; Zaborsky N; Hasenauer J
BMC Bioinformatics; 2023 Apr; 24(1):158. PubMed ID: 37081386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Dual Deep Sequencing Improves the Accuracy of Low-Frequency Somatic Mutation Detection in Cancer Gene Panel Testing.
Ura H; Togi S; Niida Y
Int J Mol Sci; 2020 May; 21(10):. PubMed ID: 32429412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. ISOWN: accurate somatic mutation identification in the absence of normal tissue controls.
Kalatskaya I; Trinh QM; Spears M; McPherson JD; Bartlett JMS; Stein L
Genome Med; 2017 Jun; 9(1):59. PubMed ID: 28659176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. KATK: Fast genotyping of rare variants directly from unmapped sequencing reads.
Kaplinski L; Möls M; Puurand T; Pajuste FD; Remm M
Hum Mutat; 2021 Jun; 42(6):777-786. PubMed ID: 33715282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Computer-assisted reading of DNA sequences.
Le H; Hinchcliffe M; Yu B; Trent RJ
Methods Mol Med; 2008; 141():177-97. PubMed ID: 18453090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. SomatoSim: precision simulation of somatic single nucleotide variants.
Hawari MA; Hong CS; Biesecker LG
BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Mar; 22(1):109. PubMed ID: 33676403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Best practices for variant calling in clinical sequencing.
Koboldt DC
Genome Med; 2020 Oct; 12(1):91. PubMed ID: 33106175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of somatic variant detection algorithms using Ion Torrent targeted deep sequencing data.
Wang Q; Kotoula V; Hsu PC; Papadopoulou K; Ho JWK; Fountzilas G; Giannoulatou E
BMC Med Genomics; 2019 Dec; 12(Suppl 9):181. PubMed ID: 31874647
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Improving somatic exome sequencing performance by biological replicates.
Cebeci YE; Erturk RA; Ergun MA; Baysan M
BMC Bioinformatics; 2024 Mar; 25(1):124. PubMed ID: 38519906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Accurate somatic variant detection using weakly supervised deep learning.
Krishnamachari K; Lu D; Swift-Scott A; Yeraliyev A; Lee K; Huang W; Leng SN; Skanderup AJ
Nat Commun; 2022 Jul; 13(1):4248. PubMed ID: 35869060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combining accurate tumor genome simulation with crowdsourcing to benchmark somatic structural variant detection.
Lee AY; Ewing AD; Ellrott K; Hu Y; Houlahan KE; Bare JC; Espiritu SMG; Huang V; Dang K; Chong Z; Caloian C; Yamaguchi TN; ; Kellen MR; Chen K; Norman TC; Friend SH; Guinney J; Stolovitzky G; Haussler D; Margolin AA; Stuart JM; Boutros PC
Genome Biol; 2018 Nov; 19(1):188. PubMed ID: 30400818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
