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 *

201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35110657)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 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. Comparison of calling pipelines for whole genome sequencing: an empirical study demonstrating the importance of mapping and alignment.
    Betschart RO; Thiéry A; Aguilera-Garcia D; Zoche M; Moch H; Twerenbold R; Zeller T; Blankenberg S; Ziegler A
    Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):21502. PubMed ID: 36513709
    [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 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]  

  • 6. Accuracy and efficiency of germline variant calling pipelines for human genome data.
    Zhao S; Agafonov O; Azab A; Stokowy T; Hovig E
    Sci Rep; 2020 Nov; 10(1):20222. PubMed ID: 33214604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Comparison of three variant callers for human whole genome sequencing.
    Supernat A; Vidarsson OV; Steen VM; Stokowy T
    Sci Rep; 2018 Dec; 8(1):17851. PubMed ID: 30552369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. FVC as an adaptive and accurate method for filtering variants from popular NGS analysis pipelines.
    Ren Y; Kong Y; Zhou X; Genchev GZ; Zhou C; Zhao H; Lu H
    Commun Biol; 2022 Sep; 5(1):975. PubMed ID: 36114280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. ICR142 Benchmarker: evaluating, optimising and benchmarking variant calling performance using the ICR142 NGS validation series.
    Ruark E; Holt E; Renwick A; Münz M; Wakeling M; Ellard S; Mahamdallie S; Yost S; Rahman N
    Wellcome Open Res; 2018; 3():108. PubMed ID: 30483600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. DeepVariant-on-Spark: Small-Scale Genome Analysis Using a Cloud-Based Computing Framework.
    Huang PJ; Chang JH; Lin HH; Li YX; Lee CC; Su CT; Li YL; Chang MT; Weng S; Cheng WH; Chiu CH; Tang P
    Comput Math Methods Med; 2020; 2020():7231205. PubMed ID: 32952600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of SNP calling using single and multiple-sample calling algorithms by validation against array base genotyping and Mendelian inheritance.
    Kumar P; Al-Shafai M; Al Muftah WA; Chalhoub N; Elsaid MF; Aleem AA; Suhre K
    BMC Res Notes; 2014 Oct; 7():747. PubMed ID: 25339461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. The size and composition of haplotype reference panels impact the accuracy of imputation from low-pass sequencing in cattle.
    Lloret-Villas A; Pausch H; Leonard AS
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 May; 55(1):33. PubMed ID: 37170101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The evaluation of Bcftools mpileup and GATK HaplotypeCaller for variant calling in non-human species.
    Lefouili M; Nam K
    Sci Rep; 2022 Jul; 12(1):11331. PubMed ID: 35790846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.