Cited by 241Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGenomics and Rare DiseasesGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Curated variation benchmarks for challenging medically relevant autosomal genes

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The repetitive nature and complexity of some medically relevant genes poses a challenge for their accurate analysis in a clinical setting. The Genome in a Bottle Consortium has provided variant benchmark sets, but these exclude nearly 400 medically relevant genes due to their repetitiveness or polymorphic complexity. Here, we characterize 273 of these 395 challenging autosomal genes using a haplotype-resolved whole-genome assembly. This curated benchmark reports over 17,000 single-nucleotide variations, 3,600 insertions and deletions and 200 structural variations each for human genome reference GRCh37 and GRCh38 across HG002. We show that false duplications in either GRCh37 or GRCh38 result in reference-specific, missed variants for short- and long-read technologies in medically relevant genes, including CBS, CRYAA and KCNE1. When masking these false duplications, variant recall can improve from 8% to 100%. Forming benchmarks from a haplotype-resolved whole-genome assembly may become a prototype for future benchmarks covering the whole genome.

Overview

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/s41587-021-01158-1

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • The GIAB CMRG benchmark spans 273 medically relevant genes that are highly repetitive and diverse and were excluded from the genome-wide benchmark.

    “This GIAB benchmark spans 273 medically relevant genes that are highly repetitive and diverse and were therefore excluded from the genome-wide benchmark12.”

    From Comprehensive genome analysis and variant detection at scale using DRAGEN (2025) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Introduction says the CMRG benchmark covers 273 medically relevant genes that were incompletely covered by previous GIAB benchmarks, and the Results describe these genes as substantially more challenging. But the Introduction specifies that up to 90% of each gene’s bases were already included, so saying the genes were excluded from the genome-wide benchmark overstates the finding. The paper describes several kinds of challenges, not every gene as both highly repetitive and diverse. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For SNVs, benchmarking was performed on both genome-wide (NIST GIAB v.4.2.1 high-confidence regions) and CMRG regions (GIAB v.1.0).

    “For SNVs, benchmarking was performed on both genome-wide (NIST GIAB v.4.2.1 high-confidence regions) and CMRG regions (GIAB v.1.0) (ref. 12).”
  • PanGenie genotyping of HG002 based on SVs at challenging medically relevant loci resulted in a precision of 0.74 and an adjusted recall of 0.81.

    “Furthermore, we used PanGenie to genotype HG002 and evaluated genotypes based on SVs at challenging medically relevant loci47. This analysis resulted in a precision of 0.74 and an adjusted recall of 0.81 (Methods).”

    From A draft human pangenome reference. (2023) · cites this paper as [47]

  • These benefits were greatest at complex loci.

    “These benefits were also greatest at complex loci47.”

    From A draft human pangenome reference. (2023) · cites this paper as [47]

  • The CHM13-based pangenome offers the largest gains in variant calling in challenging regions like those assessed by the CMRG truth set.

    “Unsurprisingly, the CHM13-based pangenome offers the largest gains in variant calling in challenging regions like those assessed by the Challenging Medically Relevant Genes (CMRG) truth set (Fig. 2e) 29 .”

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3997 (2013). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Wagner, J., Olson, N. D., Harris, L., McDaniel, J., Cheng, H., Fungtammasan, A., Hwang, Y.-C., Gupta, R., Wenger, A. M., Rowell, W. J., Khan, Z. M., Farek, J., Zhu, Y., Pisupati, A., Mahmoud, M., Xiao, C., Yoo, B., Sahraeian, S. M. E., Miller, D. E., Jáspez, D., Lorenzo-Salazar, J. M., Muñoz-Barrera, A., Rubio-Rodríguez, L. A., Flores, C., Narzisi, G., Evani, U. S., Clarke, W. E., Lee, J., Mason, C. E., Lincoln, S. E., Miga, K. H., Ebbert, M. T. W., Shumate, A., Li, H., Chin, C.-S., Zook, J. M., & Sedlazeck, F. J.
Affiliations
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
  • DNAnexus (United States) (US)
  • Pacific Biosciences (United States) (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Children's Mercy Hospital (US)
  • Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
  • Instituto Tecnológico y de Energías Renovables (ES)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES)
  • New York Genome Center (US)
  • BioNano Genomics (United States) (US)
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • Invitae (United States) (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Chin, Chen-Shan
  • Zook, Justin M.
  • Sedlazeck, Fritz J.
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2022-02-07
Volume
40
Issue
5
Pages
672-680
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W4210887696
Cited by
241
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 38
FWCI
15.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • United States Department of Commerce | National Institute of Standards and Technology (Intramural)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Human Genome Research Institute (R01 HG010040, UM1 HG008898)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | U.S. National Library of Medicine (Intramural)
  • Cabildo Insular de La Palma (BOC n.º 163, 24/08/2017)
  • Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness | Instituto de Salud Carlos III (PI20/00876)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Keywords
variant calling, indels, structural variants, CBS, CRYAA, KCNE1, Genome in a Bottle, HG002
MeSH terms
Haplotypes, Humans, Genome, Human, Sequence Analysis, DNA

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