Toscanini U, Gusmão L, Álava Narváez M C, Álvarez J C, Baldassarri L, Barbaro A, Berardi G, Betancor Hernández E, Camargo M, Carreras-Carbonell J, Castro J, Costa S C, Coufalova P, Domínguez V, Fagundes de Carvalho E, Ferreira S T G, Furfuro S, García O, Goios A, González R, de la Vega A González, Gorostiza A, Hernández A, Jiménez Moreno S, Lareu M V, León Almagro A, Marino M, Martínez G, Miozzo M C, Modesti N M, Onofri V, Pagano S, Pardo Arias B, Pedrosa S, Penacino G A, Pontes M L, Porto M J, Puente-Prieto J, Pérez R Ramírez, Ribeiro T, Rodríguez Cardozo B, Rodríguez Lesmes Y M, Sala A, Santiago B, Saragoni V G, Serrano A, Streitenberger E R, Torres Morales M A, Vannelli Rey S A, Velázquez Miranda M, Whittle M R, Fernández K, Salas A
PRICAI-Fundación Favaloro, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
DNA Diagnostic Laboratory (LDD), State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; IPATIMUP (Institute of Pathology and Molecular Immunology from de University of Porto), Porto, Portugal; I3s (Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto), Porto, Portugal.
Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016 Nov;25:63-72. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.07.010. Epub 2016 Jul 19.
Since 1992, the Spanish and Portuguese-Speaking Working Group of the ISFG (GHEP-ISFG) has been organizing annual Intercomparison Exercises (IEs) coordinated by the Quality Service at the National Institute of Toxicology and Forensic Sciences (INTCF) from Madrid, aiming to provide proficiency tests for forensic DNA laboratories. Each annual exercise comprises a Basic (recently accredited under ISO/IEC 17043: 2010) and an Advanced Level, both including a kinship and a forensic module. Here, we show the results for both autosomal and sex-chromosomal STRs, and for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in two samples included in the forensic modules, namely a mixture 2:1 (v/v) saliva/blood (M4) and a mixture 4:1 (v/v) saliva/semen (M8) out of the five items provided in the 2014 GHEP-ISFG IE. Discrepancies, other than typos or nomenclature errors (over the total allele calls), represented 6.5% (M4) and 4.7% (M8) for autosomal STRs, 15.4% (M4) and 7.8% (M8) for X-STRs, and 1.2% (M4) and 0.0% (M8) for Y-STRs. Drop-out and drop-in alleles were the main cause of errors, with laboratories using different criteria regarding inclusion of minor peaks and stutter bands. Commonly used commercial kits yielded different results for a micro-variant detected at locus D12S391. In addition, the analysis of electropherograms revealed that the proportions of the contributors detected in the mixtures varied among the participants. In regards to mtDNA analysis, besides important discrepancies in reporting heteroplasmies, there was no agreement for the results of sample M4. Thus, while some laboratories documented a single control region haplotype, a few reported unexpected profiles (suggesting contamination problems). For M8, most laboratories detected only the haplotype corresponding to the saliva. Although the GHEP-ISFG has already a large experience in IEs, the present multi-centric study revealed challenges that still exist related to DNA mixtures interpretation. Overall, the results emphasize the need for further research and training actions in order to improve the analysis of mixtures among the forensic practitioners.
自1992年以来,国际法医遗传学会(ISFG)的西班牙语和葡萄牙语工作组(GHEP - ISFG)一直在组织年度比对试验(IEs),由马德里国家毒理学和法医学研究所(INTCF)的质量服务部门协调,旨在为法医DNA实验室提供能力验证测试。每年的试验包括一个基础水平(最近已根据ISO/IEC 17043:2010获得认可)和一个高级水平,两者都包括亲缘关系和法医模块。在此,我们展示了2014年GHEP - ISFG IE提供的五个样本中,法医模块所包含的两个样本(即2:1(v/v)唾液/血液混合物(M4)和4:1(v/v)唾液/精液混合物(M8))中常染色体和性染色体STR以及线粒体DNA(mtDNA)的检测结果。除排版或命名错误(在所有等位基因分型中)外,常染色体STR的差异在M4中占6.5%,在M8中占4.7%;X - STR的差异在M4中占15.4%,在M8中占7.8%;Y - STR的差异在M4中占1.2%,在M8中占0.0%。等位基因缺失和增加是错误的主要原因,各实验室在小峰和拖带的纳入标准上存在差异。常用的商业试剂盒对D12S391位点检测到的一个微变异产生了不同结果。此外,电泳图分析显示,混合物中检测到的贡献者比例在参与者之间各不相同。关于mtDNA分析,除了在报告异质性方面存在重大差异外,样本M4的结果也未达成一致。因此,一些实验室记录了单一的控制区单倍型,而少数实验室报告了意外的图谱(提示存在污染问题)。对于M8,大多数实验室仅检测到与唾液对应的单倍型。尽管GHEP - ISFG在比对试验方面已经有丰富经验,但目前的多中心研究揭示了在DNA混合物解释方面仍然存在的挑战。总体而言,结果强调需要进一步开展研究和培训行动,以改进法医从业者对混合物的分析。