Cited by 117Genomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Recent advances in the detection of repeat expansions with short-read next-generation sequencing

Open access
Bahlo, Melanie, Bennett, Mark F, Degorski, Peter, Tankard, Rick M, Delatycki, Martin B, Lockhart, Paul J·2018·F1000Research

Abstract

Short tandem repeats (STRs), also known as microsatellites, are commonly defined as consisting of tandemly repeated nucleotide motifs of 2–6 base pairs in length. STRs appear throughout the human genome, and about 239,000 are documented in the Simple Repeats Track available from the UCSC (University of California, Santa Cruz) genome browser. STRs vary in size, producing highly polymorphic markers commonly used as genetic markers. A small fraction of STRs (about 30 loci) have been associated with human disease whereby one or both alleles exceed an STR-specific threshold in size, leading to disease. Detection of repeat expansions is currently performed with polymerase chain reaction–based assays or with Southern blots for large expansions. The tests are expensive and time-consuming and are not always conclusive, leading to lengthy diagnostic journeys for patients, potentially including missed diagnoses. The advent of whole exome and whole genome sequencing has identified the genetic cause of many genetic disorders; however, analysis pipelines are focused primarily on the detection of short nucleotide variations and short insertions and deletions (indels). Until recently, repeat expansions, with the exception of the smallest expansion (SCA6), were not detectable in next-generation short-read sequencing datasets and would have been ignored in most analyses. In the last two years, four analysis methods with accompanying software (ExpansionHunter, exSTRa, STRetch, and TREDPARSE) have been released. Although a comprehensive comparative analysis of the performance of these methods across all known repeat expansions is still lacking, it is clear that these methods are a valuable addition to any existing analysis pipeline. Here, we detail how to assess short-read data for evidence of expansions, reviewing all four methods and outlining their strengths and weaknesses. Implementation of these methods should lead to increased diagnostic yield of repeat expansion disorders for known STR loci and has the potential to detect novel repeat expansions.

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 · 10.12688/f1000research.13980.1

Cites

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?

  • Missing ASD heritability may partly result from difficulty resolving repetitive DNA variants from short-read data.

    “the “missing heritability” could, in part, be attributed to the difficulty of resolving complex variants such as variations in repetitive regions of DNA from short-read next-generation sequence data24,25.”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 29 · Cited by 117

Authors
Bahlo, M., Bennett, M. F., Degorski, P., Tankard, R. M., Delatycki, M. B., & Lockhart, P. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (AU)
  • Murdoch University (AU)
  • Royal Children's Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Bahlo, Melanie
Venue
F1000Research
Published
2018-06-13
Volume
7
Pages
736
ISSN
2046-1402 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2808685112
Cited by
117
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
7.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • F1000Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Australian Government NHMRC IRIIS
  • Victorian Government’s Operational Infrastructure Support Program
  • NHMRC Senior Research Fellowship (110297)
  • NHMRC Program Grant (1054618)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
repeat expansion, microsatellite markers, short-read sequencing, stretching, repeat expansion disorders, genetic diagnosis, diagnostic yield

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