2018
DOI: 10.1101/361162
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Profiling the genome-wide landscape of tandem repeat expansions

Abstract: Tandem Repeat (TR) expansions have been implicated in dozens of genetic diseases, including Huntington's Disease, Fragile X Syndrome, and hereditary ataxias. Furthermore, TRs have recently been implicated in a range of complex traits, including gene expression and cancer risk. While the human genome harbors hundreds of thousands of TRs, analysis of TR expansions has been mainly limited to known pathogenic loci. A major challenge is that expanded repeats are beyond the read length of most next-generation sequen… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
94
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(96 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
94
0
Order By: Relevance
“…ExpansionHunter was the first computational method for genotyping STRs from short-read sequencing data capable of consistently genotyping repeats longer than the read length and, hence, detecting pathogenic repeat expansions (Dolzhenko et al 2017). Since the initial release of ExpansionHunter, several other methods have been developed and were shown to accurately identify long (greater than read length) repeat expansions (Dashnow et al 2018;Tang et al 2017;Mousavi, Shleizer-Burko, and Gymrek 2018;Tankard et al 2018 An even more extreme example is the CAGG repeat in the CNBP gene whose expansions cause Myotonic Dystrophy type 2 (DM2). This repeat is adjacent to polymorphic CA and CAGA repeats (Liquori et al 2001) making it particularly difficult to accurately align reads to this locus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ExpansionHunter was the first computational method for genotyping STRs from short-read sequencing data capable of consistently genotyping repeats longer than the read length and, hence, detecting pathogenic repeat expansions (Dolzhenko et al 2017). Since the initial release of ExpansionHunter, several other methods have been developed and were shown to accurately identify long (greater than read length) repeat expansions (Dashnow et al 2018;Tang et al 2017;Mousavi, Shleizer-Burko, and Gymrek 2018;Tankard et al 2018 An even more extreme example is the CAGG repeat in the CNBP gene whose expansions cause Myotonic Dystrophy type 2 (DM2). This repeat is adjacent to polymorphic CA and CAGA repeats (Liquori et al 2001) making it particularly difficult to accurately align reads to this locus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Probands were selected to be negative for syndromic forms of ASD and most known pathogenic mutations including large CNVs and de novo point mutations in coding regions 5 , thus enriching for probands with other classes of pathogenic mutations. We used GangSTR 25 to estimate diploid repeat lengths at 1,131,232 autosomal TRs with repeat unit lengths 1-20bp in each sample. Resulting genotypes were subject to stringent filtering to remove low-quality calls ( Methods ).…”
Section: Identifying De Novo Tr Mutations In the Ssc Cohortmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To demonstrate the feasibility of such analyses, we analyzed 91 Coriell samples with experimentally-confirmed expansions in repeats associated with Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA; N=25), Myotonic Dystrophy type 1 (DM1; N=17), Huntington disease (HD; N=14), and fragile X syndrome (FXS; N=35). This dataset has been previously used to benchmark the performance of existing methods [23][24][25] .…”
Section: Analysis Of Sequencing Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing methods for repeat expansion detection rely upon predefined repeat catalogs [22][23][24][25][26]38 . Although these methods can analyze user-defined catalogs, defining the genomic locations of repeats is a complex task and there is a risk of missing many potentially-pathogenic loci.…”
Section: Genome Wide Catalogs Are Limitingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation