Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 522

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Discovery and characterization of artifactual mutations in deep coverage targeted capture sequencing data due to oxidative DNA damage during sample preparation

Open access
Costello, Maura, Pugh, Trevor J., Fennell, Timothy J., Stewart, Chip, Lichtenstein, Lee, Meldrim, James C., Fostel, Jennifer L., Friedrich, Dennis C., Perrin, Danielle, Dionne, Danielle, Kim, Sharon, Gabriel, Stacey B., Lander, Eric S., Fisher, Sheila, Getz, Gad·2013·Nucleic Acids Research

Abstract

As researchers begin probing deep coverage sequencing data for increasingly rare mutations and subclonal events, the fidelity of next generation sequencing (NGS) laboratory methods will become increasingly critical. Although error rates for sequencing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are well documented, the effects that DNA extraction and other library preparation steps could have on downstream sequence integrity have not been thoroughly evaluated. Here, we describe the discovery of novel C > A/G > T transversion artifacts found at low allelic fractions in targeted capture data. Characteristics such as sequencer read orientation and presence in both tumor and normal samples strongly indicated a non-biological mechanism. We identified the source as oxidation of DNA during acoustic shearing in samples containing reactive contaminants from the extraction process. We show generation of 8-oxoguanine (8-oxoG) lesions during DNA shearing, present analysis tools to detect oxidation in sequencing data and suggest methods to reduce DNA oxidation through the introduction of antioxidants. Further, informatics methods are presented to confidently filter these artifacts from sequencing data sets. Though only seen in a low percentage of reads in affected samples, such artifacts could have profoundly deleterious effects on the ability to confidently call rare mutations, and eliminating other possible sources of artifacts should become a priority for the research community.

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 · 10.1093/nar/gks1443

Cites

44 of 44 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

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

Show all 44 references

Cited by

See all 522

Metadata

Authors
Costello, M., Pugh, T. J., Fennell, T. J., Stewart, C., Lichtenstein, L., Meldrim, J. C., Fostel, J. L., Friedrich, D. C., Perrin, D., Dionne, D., Kim, S., Gabriel, S. B., Lander, E. S., Fisher, S., & Getz, G.
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2013-01-07
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
e67-e67
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W2107356675
Cited by
522
References
44
FWCI
8.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Discovery and characterization of artifactual mutations in deep coverage targeted capture sequencing data due to oxidative DNA damage during sample preparation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/gks1443
The paper
Costello, M., Pugh, T. J., Fennell, T. J., Stewart, C., Lichtenstein, L., Meldrim, J. C., Fostel, J. L., Friedrich, D. C., Perrin, D., Dionne, D., Kim, S., Gabriel, S. B., Lander, E. S., Fisher, S., & Getz, G. (2013). Discovery and characterization of artifactual mutations in deep coverage targeted capture sequencing data due to oxidative DNA damage during sample preparation. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1443

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.