Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 399

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microsatellite Instability Detection by Next Generation Sequencing

Salipante, Stephen J, Scroggins, Sheena M, Hampel, Heather L, Turner, Emily H, Pritchard, Colin C·2014·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a useful phenotype in cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nevertheless, methods to detect MSI status from next generation DNA sequencing (NGS) data are underdeveloped. METHODS: We developed an approach to detect the MSI phenotype using NGS (mSINGS). The method was used to evaluate mononucleotide microsatellite loci that were incidentally sequenced after targeted gene enrichment and could be applied to gene or exome capture panels designed for other purposes. For each microsatellite locus, the number of differently sized repeats in experimental samples were quantified and compared to a population of normal controls. Loci were considered unstable if the experimental number of repeats was statistically greater than in the control population. MSI status was determined by the fraction of unstable microsatellite loci. RESULTS: We examined data from 324 samples generated using targeted gene capture assays of 3 different sizes, ranging from a 0.85-Mb to a 44-Mb exome design and incorporating from 15 to 2957 microsatellite markers. When we compared mSING results to MSI-PCR as a gold standard for 108 cases, we found the approach to be both diagnostically sensitive (range of 96.4% to 100% across 3 panels) and specific (range of 97.2% to 100%) for determining MSI status. The fraction of unstable microsatellite markers calculated from sequencing data correlated with the number of unstable loci detected by conventional MSI-PCR testing. CONCLUSIONS: NGS data can enable highly accurate detection of MSI, even from limited capture designs. This novel approach offers several advantages over existing PCR-based methods.

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 · 10.1373/clinchem.2014.223677

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 399

Metadata

Authors
Salipante, S. J., Scroggins, S. M., Hampel, H. L., Turner, E. H., & Pritchard, C. C.
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2014-09-01
Volume
60
Issue
9
Pages
1192-1199
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2156021518
Cited by
399
References
3
FWCI
10.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Microsatellite Instability Detection by Next Generation Sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1373/clinchem.2014.223677
The paper
Salipante, S. J., Scroggins, S. M., Hampel, H. L., Turner, E. H., & Pritchard, C. C. (2014). Microsatellite Instability Detection by Next Generation Sequencing. Clinical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2014.223677

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.