↓ Skip to main content

Assessing Matched Normal and Tumor Pairs in Next-Generation Sequencing Studies

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing Matched Normal and Tumor Pairs in Next-Generation Sequencing Studies
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0017810
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liang Goh, Geng Bo Chen, Ioana Cutcutache, Benjamin Low, Bin Tean Teh, Steve Rozen, Patrick Tan

Abstract

Next generation sequencing technology has revolutionized the study of cancers. Through matched normal-tumor pairs, it is now possible to identify genome-wide germline and somatic mutations. The generation and analysis of the data requires rigorous quality checks and filtering, and the current analytical pipeline is constantly undergoing improvements. We noted however that in analyzing matched pairs, there is an implicit assumption that the sequenced data are matched, without any quality check such as those implemented in association studies. There are serious implications in this assumption as identification of germline and rare somatic variants depend on the normal sample being the matched pair. Using a genetics concept on measuring relatedness between individuals, we demonstrate that the matchedness of tumor pairs can be quantified and should be included as part of a quality protocol in analysis of sequenced data. Despite the mutation changes in cancer samples, matched tumor-normal pairs are still relatively similar in sequence compared to non-matched pairs. We demonstrate that the approach can be used to assess the mutation landscape between individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 2 3%
France 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
China 1 1%
Unknown 61 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Other 9 13%
Student > Master 8 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Computer Science 6 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 7 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2013.
All research outputs
#18,347,414
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#154,206
of 193,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,874
of 119,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,195
of 1,399 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 119,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,399 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.