MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415954714 · doi:10.1016/j.jhlto.2025.100433

Rapid donor-specific single nucleotide variation detection by nanopore sequencing of ex vivo lung perfusate

2025· article· en· W4415954714 on OpenAlexafffund
Haruchika Yamamoto, Jonathan Allen, A. Sundby, Philip C. Zuzarte, Shaf Keshavjee, Jared T. Simpson, Gavin W. Wilson, Jonathan Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueJHLT Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity Health Network
FundersCentre for Applied GenomicsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsNanoporeEx vivoNanopore sequencingSNPDNA sequencingSingle-nucleotide polymorphism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) has been shown to be useful in monitoring lung graft health, and single nucleotide variations (SNVs) between donor and recipient are used to identify ddcfDNA in post-transplant recipient blood. One limitation is the need to map donor or recipient SNVs prior to calculating %ddcfDNA. In this study, we use Nanopore sequencing of ex vivo lung perfusion perfusate cfDNA to map donor SNVs and validate it using standard short-read whole genome sequencing (WGS). Methods: cfDNA was extracted from 11 clinical ex vivo lung perfusion perfusate samples and sequenced using a Nanopore sequencer. SNVs were identified by comparison to a reference genome and then filtered for homozygous calls overlapping the 1000 Genomes SNP database. Matching short-read WGS was performed on 6 matching samples to act as a gold standard. Following mapping, %ddcfDNA was calculated in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) collected from matching post-lung transplant recipient plasma using SNVs called by Nanopore vs SNVs called by short-read WGS and compared for accuracy. Results Nanopore sequencing yielded genomic data with a median coverage of 4.88x (range 2.27-8.79) using a single flow cell with a median run length of 72 hours. The median general error rate of the sequence was 5.55% (range 4.98%-6.49%), and the median number of SNV with a depth > 3 and overlap with the 1000 Genomes SNP database was 246,993 (range 99,357-313,721). The positive predictive value of SNVs identified using 2X to 6X coverage cutoffs ranged from 66.6% to 96.9%, with a median value of 90.3% at 6X coverage. Correlation analysis showed a strong correlation between results by Nanopore sequencing and results by WGS for detecting %ddcfDNA in post-transplant plasma (R^2 = 0.996, p < 0.001). Conclusions Despite the lower sequencing accuracy and depth obtained from Nanopore sequencing, a high positive predictive value can be achieved in a set of donor-specific SNVs when appropriately filtered by read depth and overlap with SNP databases. This demonstrates the potential for the use of Nanopore sequencing to generate personalized donor cfDNA maps for use in post-operative donor-derived plasma cfDNA identification.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHLT OpenSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207