While increasingly large reference panels for genome-wide imputation have been recently made available, the degree to which imputation accuracy can be enhanced by population-specific reference panels remains an open question. Here, we sequenced at full-depth (≥ 30×), across two platforms (Illumina X Ten and Complete Genomics, Inc.), a moderately large (n = 738) cohort of samples drawn from the Ashkenazi Jewish population. We developed a series of quality control steps to optimize sensitivity, specificity, and comprehensiveness of variant calls in the reference panel, and then tested the accuracy of imputation against target cohorts drawn from the same population. Quality control (QC) thresholds for the Illumina X Ten platform were identified that permitted highly accurate calling of single nucleotide variants across 94% of the genome. QC procedures also identified numerous regions that are poorly mapped using current reference or alternate assemblies. After stringent QC, the population-specific reference panel produced more accurate and comprehensive imputation results relative to publicly available, large cosmopolitan reference panels, especially in the range of rare variants that may be most critical to further progress in mapping of complex phenotypes. The population-specific reference panel also permitted enhanced filtering of clinically irrelevant variants from personal genomes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6954822 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00439-018-1886-z | DOI Listing |
Mil Med
January 2025
Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Gynecologic Surgery & Obstetrics, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, HI 96859, USA.
Endometrial cancer is the most prevalent gynecologic cancer in the United States and has rising incidence and mortality. Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical endometrial hyperplasia (EIN-AEH), a precancerous neoplasm, is surgically managed with hysterectomy in patients who have completed childbearing because of risk of progression to cancer. Concurrent endometrial carcinoma (EC) is also present on hysterectomy specimens in up to 50% of cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFTrials
January 2025
Palliative and Advanced Illness Research (PAIR) Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Background: A key challenge for many critical care clinical trials is that some patients will die before their outcome is fully measured. This is referred to as "truncation due to death" and must be accounted for in both the treatment effect definition (i.e.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOne of the major challenges in genomic data sharing is protecting participants' privacy in collaborative studies and when genomic data is outsourced to perform analysis tasks, e.g., genotype imputation services and federated collaborations genomic analysis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSTAR Protoc
January 2025
Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Electronic address:
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields clinically approved for cancer treatment, delivered via arrays attached to the patient's skin. Here, we present a protocol for applying TTFields to torso orthotopic and subcutaneous mouse tumor models using the inovivo system. We guide users on proper system component connections, study protocol design, mouse fur depilation, array application, and treatment condition adjustment and monitoring.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRadiol Imaging Cancer
January 2025
From Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).
Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy among male individuals in the United States and requires careful imaging approaches because of its varied presentations. This review examines prostate cancer imaging guidelines from leading organizations, including the American College of Radiology, American Urological Association, European Association of Urology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and serves as a reference highlighting commonalities and divergences in current imaging recommendations across prostate cancer states. We outline these organizations and their methods, focusing on their approaches to panel expertise, guideline development, evidence grading, and revision schedules.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!