We present an analysis of supplementary materials of PubMed Central (PMC) articles and show their importance in indexing and searching biomedical literature, in particular for the emerging genomic medicine field. On a subset of articles from PubMed Central, we use text mining methods to extract MeSH terms from abstracts, full texts, and text-based supplementary materials. We find that the recall of MeSH annotations increases by about 5.9 percentage points (+20% on relative percentage) when considering supplementary materials compared to using only abstracts. We further compare the supplementary material annotations with full-text annotations and we find out that the recall of MeSH terms increases by 1.5 percentage point (+3% on relative percentage). Additionally, we analyze genetic variant mentions in abstracts and full-texts and compare them with mentions found in supplementary text-based files. We find that the majority (about 99%) of variants are found in text-based supplementary files. In conclusion, we suggest that supplementary data should receive more attention from the information retrieval community, in particular in life and health sciences.