Schuster, S. C. Next-generation sequencing transforms today’s biology. Nat. Methods 5, 16–18 (2008).
Google Scholar
Shendure, J. & Ji, H. Next-generation DNA sequencing. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 1135–1145 (2008).
Google Scholar
DePristo, M. A. et al. A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data. Nat. Genet. 43, 491–498 (2011).
Google Scholar
Mardis, E. R. The impact of next-generation sequencing technology on genetics. Trends Genet. 24, 133–141 (2008).
Google Scholar
MacLean, D., Jones, J. D. & Studholme, D. J. Application of ‘next-generation’ sequencing technologies to microbial genetics. Nature Rev. Microbiol. 7, 96–97 (2009).
Glenn, T. C. Field guide to next-generation DNA sequencers. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 11, 759–769 (2011).
Google Scholar
Aziz, N. et al. College of American Pathologists’ laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 139, 481–493 (2015).
Google Scholar
Schlaberg, R. et al. Validation of metagenomic next-generation sequencing tests for universal pathogen detection. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 141, 776–786 (2017).
Google Scholar
Zhou, J. et al. Reproducibility and quantitation of amplicon sequencing-based detection. ISME J. 5, 1303–1313 (2011).
Google Scholar
Mellmann, A. et al. High interlaboratory reproducibility and accuracy of next-generation-sequencing-based bacterial genotyping in a ring trial. J. Clin. Microbiol. 55, 908–913 (2017).
Google Scholar
Quail, M. A. et al. A tale of three next generation sequencing platforms: comparison of Ion Torrent, Pacific Biosciences and Illumina MiSeq sequencers. BMC Genomics 13, 341 (2012).
Google Scholar
Shi, L. et al. The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC) project shows inter- and intraplatform reproducibility of gene expression measurements. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1151–1161 (2006).
Google Scholar
Shi, L. et al. The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study of common practices for the development and validation of microarray-based predictive models. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 827–838 (2010).
Google Scholar
Li, S. et al. Multi-platform assessment of transcriptome profiling using RNA-seq in the ABRF next-generation sequencing study. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 915–925 (2014).
Google Scholar
Su, Z. et al. A comprehensive assessment of RNA-seq accuracy, reproducibility and information content by the Sequencing Quality Control Consortium. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 903–914 (2014).
Google Scholar
Wang, C. et al. The concordance between RNA-seq and microarray data depends on chemical treatment and transcript abundance. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 926–932 (2014).
Google Scholar
Li, S. et al. Detecting and correcting systematic variation in large-scale RNA sequencing data. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 888–895 (2014).
Google Scholar
Risso, D., Ngai, J., Speed, T. P. & Dudoit, S. Normalization of RNA-seq data using factor analysis of control genes or samples. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 896–902 (2014).
Google Scholar
Merker, J. D. et al. Proficiency testing of standardized samples shows very high interlaboratory agreement for clinical next-generation sequencing–based oncology assays. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 143, 463–471 (2019).
Google Scholar
Mahamdallie, S. et al. The ICR639 CPG NGS validation series: a resource to assess analytical sensitivity of cancer predisposition gene testing. Wellcome Open Res. 3, 68 (2018).
Google Scholar
Zhong, Q. et al. Multi-laboratory proficiency testing of clinical cancer genomic profiling by next-generation sequencing. Pathol. Res. Pract. 214, 957–963 (2018).
Google Scholar
Zook, J. M. et al. An open resource for accurately benchmarking small variant and reference calls. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 561–566 (2019).
Google Scholar
Krusche, P. et al. Best practices for benchmarking germline small-variant calls in human genomes. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 555–560 (2019).
Google Scholar
Zook, J. M. et al. Extensive sequencing of seven human genomes to characterize benchmark reference materials. Sci. Data 3, 160025 (2016).
Google Scholar
Zook, J. M. et al. A robust benchmark for detection of germline large deletions and insertions. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 1347–1355 (2020).
Google Scholar
Ball, M. P. et al. A public resource facilitating clinical use of genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 11920–11927 (2012).
Google Scholar
Benson, G. Tandem repeats finder: a program to analyze DNA sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 573–580 (1999).
Google Scholar
Wagner, J. et al. Benchmarking challenging small variants with linked and long reads. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.24.212712 (2020).
Landrum, M. J. & Kattman, B. L. ClinVar at five years: delivering on the promise. Hum. Mutat. 39, 1623–1630 (2018).
Google Scholar
Amberger, J. S., Bocchini, C. A., Schiettecatte, F., Scott, A. F. & Hamosh, A. OMIM.org: Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), an online catalog of human genes and genetic disorders. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D789–D798 (2015).
Google Scholar
Jeffares, D. C. et al. Transient structural variations have strong effects on quantitative traits and reproductive isolation in fission yeast. Nat. Commun. 8, 14061 (2017).
Google Scholar
Mahmoud, M. et al. Structural variant calling: the long and the short of it. Genome Biol. 20, 246 (2019).
Google Scholar
Sedlazeck, F. J. et al. Accurate detection of complex structural variations using single-molecule sequencing. Nat. Methods 15, 461–468 (2018).
Google Scholar
Olson, N. D. et al. precisionFDA Truth Challenge V2: calling variants from short-and long-reads in difficult-to-map regions. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.13.380741 (2020).
Freed, D. N., Aldana, R., Weber, J. A. & Edwards, J. S. The Sentieon Genomics Tools – A fast and accurate solution to variant calling from next-generation sequence data. Preprint at bioRxiv 115717 (2017).
McIntyre, A. B. et al. Comprehensive benchmarking and ensemble approaches for metagenomic classifiers. Genome Biol. 18, 182 (2017).
Google Scholar
Sogin, M. L. in PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications (eds Innis, M. et al.) (Elsevier, 2012).
Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34, 3094–3100 (2018).
Google Scholar
Pedersen, B. S. & Quinlan, A. R. Mosdepth: quick coverage calculation for genomes and exomes. Bioinformatics 34, 867–868 (2018).
Google Scholar
Poplin, R. et al. Scaling accurate genetic variant discovery to tens of thousands of samples. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/201178 (2018).
Kim, S. et al. Strelka2: fast and accurate calling of germline and somatic variants. Nat. Methods 15, 591–594 (2018).
Google Scholar
Poplin, R. et al. A universal SNP and small-indel variant caller using deep neural networks. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 983–987 (2018).
Google Scholar
Luo, R. et al. Exploring the limit of using a deep neural network on pileup data for germline variant calling. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2, 220–227 (2020).
Rausch, T. et al. DELLY: structural variant discovery by integrated paired-end and split-read analysis. Bioinformatics 28, i333–i339 (2012).
Google Scholar
Layer, R. M., Chiang, C., Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. LUMPY: a probabilistic framework for structural variant discovery. Genome Biol. 15, R84 (2014).
Google Scholar
Chen, X. et al. Manta: rapid detection of structural variants and indels for germline and cancer sequencing applications. Bioinformatics 32, 1220–1222 (2016).
Google Scholar
Conway, J. R., Lex, A. & Gehlenborg, N. UpSetR: an R package for the visualization of intersecting sets and their properties. Bioinformatics 33, 2938–2940 (2017).
Google Scholar
Gu, Z., Eils, R. & Schlesner, M. Complex heatmaps reveal patterns and correlations in multidimensional genomic data. Bioinformatics 32, 2847–2849 (2016).
Google Scholar
Toptaş, B. Ç., Rakocevic, G., Kómár, P. & Kural, D. Comparing complex variants in family trios. Bioinformatics 34, 4241–4247 (2018).
Google Scholar
