Cited by 445Genomics and Rare DiseasesBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Next-generation diagnostics and disease-gene discovery with the Exomiser

Open access
Smedley, Damian, Jacobsen, Julius O B, Jäger, Marten, Köhler, Sebastian, Holtgrewe, Manuel, Schubach, Max, Siragusa, Enrico, Zemojtel, Tomasz +5 more·2015·Nature Protocols

Abstract

Exomiser is an application that prioritizes genes and variants in next-generation sequencing (NGS) projects for novel disease-gene discovery or differential diagnostics of Mendelian disease. Exomiser comprises a suite of algorithms for prioritizing exome sequences using random-walk analysis of protein interaction networks, clinical relevance and cross-species phenotype comparisons, as well as a wide range of other computational filters for variant frequency, predicted pathogenicity and pedigree analysis. In this protocol, we provide a detailed explanation of how to install Exomiser and use it to prioritize exome sequences in a number of scenarios. Exomiser requires ∼3 GB of RAM and roughly 15-90 s of computing time on a standard desktop computer to analyze a variant call format (VCF) file. Exomiser is freely available for academic use from http://www.sanger.ac.uk/science/tools/exomiser.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nprot.2015.124

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are limited approaches for phenotype-based diagnosis, and none automatically learn phenotypic and/or genotypic features over patient phenotype terms.

    “While deep learning approaches exist for image-based diagnosis10,11, there are limited approaches for phenotype-based diagnosis, and none automatically learn phenotypic and/or genotypic features over patient phenotype terms23–28,44.”

    From Few shot learning for phenotype-driven diagnosis of patients with rare genetic diseases (2025) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Introduction sections “Alternative analysis packages” and “Overview of analysis with Exomiser” describe phenotype-based diagnostic approaches, including PhenIX’s use of HPO terms and semantic similarity. They do not establish that such approaches are limited in number or that none automatically learns phenotypic or genotypic features from patient phenotype terms. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [78]Washington NL How good is your phenotyping? Methods for quality assessment Proceedings of Phenotype Day 2014@ISMB 2014 http://phenoday2014.bio-lark.org/pdf/6.pdf 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smedley, D., Jacobsen, J. O. B., Jäger, M., Köhler, S., Holtgrewe, M., Schubach, M., Siragusa, E., Zemojtel, T., Buske, O. J., Washington, N. L., Bone, W. P., Haendel, M. A., & Robinson, P. N.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
  • Berlin-Brandenburger Centrum für Regenerative Therapien (DE)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Robinson, Peter N
Venue
Nature Protocols
Published
2015-11-12
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
2004-2015
ISSN
  • 1750-2799 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-2189
OpenAlex
W2246559112
Cited by
445
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 2
FWCI
14.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Protocols (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (R24OD011883)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
Exomiser, disease gene discovery, monogenic disorders, differential diagnosis, variant prioritization, exome sequencing, protein-protein interaction network, variant pathogenicity prediction, pedigree analysis
MeSH terms
Genetic Testing, Humans, Software, Sequence Analysis, DNA, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, Exome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review