Comparative evaluation of four exome enrichment solutions in 2024: Agilent, Roche, Vazyme and Nanodigmbio

Whole exome sequencing (WES) is essential for identifying genetic variants linked to diseases. This study compares available to date four exome enrichment kits: Agilent SureSelect Human All Exon v8, Roche KAPA HyperExome, Vazyme VAHTS Target Capture Core Exome Panel, and Nanodigmbio NEXome Plus Panel v1. We evaluated target design, coverage statistics, and variant calling accuracy across these four different exome capture products. All kits showed high target coverage, with 10x coverage exceeding 97.5% and 20x coverage above 95%. Roche exhibited the most uniform coverage, indicated by the lowest fold-80 scores, while Nanodigmbio had more on-target reads due to fewer off-target reads. Variant calling performance, evaluated using in-lab standard E701 DNA sample, showed high recall rates for all kits, especially Agilent v8. All kits achieved an F-measure above 95.87%. Nanodigmbio had the highest precision with the fewest false positives but a slightly lower F-measure than other kits. This study also highlights the performance of new solutions from Vazyme (China) and Nanodigmbio (China), which were comparable to Agilent v8 and Roche KAPA kits. These findings assist researchers and clinicians in selecting appropriate exome capture solutions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Genomics
Published
2025-01-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-024-11196-z
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.22

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative evaluation of four exome enrichment solutions in 2024: Agilent, Roche, Vazyme and Nanodigmbio

Peter Alekseevich Shatalov, Dmitriy Korostin, Iuliia Vasiliadis, Denis Rebrikov et al.
4 citations
BMC Genomics
Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
3.22
article

Comparative evaluation of four exome enrichment solutions in 2024: Agilent, Roche, Vazyme and Nanodigmbio

Peter Alekseevich Shatalov, Dmitriy Korostin, Iuliia Vasiliadis, Denis Rebrikov, Oleg N. Suchalko, Anna Shmitko, А. Д. Каприн, Vera Belova, Valery V. Cheranev, Natalya Ponikarovskaya, Alina Samitova, Zhanna Repinskaia, Peter Shegai
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Whole exome sequencing (WES) is essential for identifying genetic variants linked to diseases. This study compares available to date four exome enrichment kits: Agilent SureSelect Human All Exon v8, Roche KAPA HyperExome, Vazyme VAHTS Target Capture Core Exome Panel, and Nanodigmbio NEXome Plus Panel v1. We evaluated target design, coverage statistics, and variant calling accuracy across these four different exome capture products. All kits showed high target coverage, with 10x coverage exceeding 97.5% and 20x coverage above 95%. Roche exhibited the most uniform coverage, indicated by the lowest fold-80 scores, while Nanodigmbio had more on-target reads due to fewer off-target reads. Variant calling performance, evaluated using in-lab standard E701 DNA sample, showed high recall rates for all kits, especially Agilent v8. All kits achieved an F-measure above 95.87%. Nanodigmbio had the highest precision with the fewest false positives but a slightly lower F-measure than other kits. This study also highlights the performance of new solutions from Vazyme (China) and Nanodigmbio (China), which were comparable to Agilent v8 and Roche KAPA kits. These findings assist researchers and clinicians in selecting appropriate exome capture solutions.

BMC GenomicsVol. 26(1)
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University (RU), Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (RU), Medical Radiological Research Center (RU), Genetic Technologies (Australia) (AU)
Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
3.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.