A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits

Key Points

• The aim is to compare the performance of three CUT&RUN kits for profiling histone marks and their impact on data quality.
• Evaluated three commercial CUT&RUN kits on specific histone marks.
• Compared data quality from libraries generated with fresh and frozen cells.
• Analyzed libraries created with varying cell input numbers.
• All three kits produced high-quality libraries.
• CST protocol showed superior signal and accuracy despite fewer detected peaks for H3K4me3.
• EpiCypher achieved the highest accuracy for H3K27me3 libraries.