Suppr超能文献

性能比较:外显子组测序作为替代桑格测序的单一检测方法。

Performance comparison: exome sequencing as a single test replacing Sanger sequencing.

机构信息

Medical Genetics Institute, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, 91031, Jerusalem, Israel.

Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 91120, Jerusalem, Israel.

出版信息

Mol Genet Genomics. 2021 May;296(3):653-663. doi: 10.1007/s00438-021-01772-3. Epub 2021 Mar 11.

Abstract

Next generation sequencing tests are used routinely as first-choice tests in the clinic. However, systematic performance comparing the results of exome sequencing as a single test replacing Sanger sequencing of targeted gene(s) is still lacking. Performance comparison data are critically important for clinical case management. In this study, we compared Sanger-sequencing results of 258 genes to those obtained from next generation sequencing (NGS) using two exome-sequencing enrichment kits: Agilent-SureSelectQXT and Illumina-Nextera. Sequencing was performed on leukocytes and buccal-derived DNA from a single individual, and all 258 genes were sequenced a total of 11 times (using different sequencing methods and DNA sources). Sanger sequencing was completed for all exons, including flanking ± 8 bp regions. For the 258 genes, NGS mean coverage was > 20 × for > 98 and > 91% of the regions targeted by SureSelect and Nextera, respectively. Overall, 449 variants were identified in at least one experiment, and 407/449 (90.6%) were detected by all. Of the 42 discordant variants, 23 were determined as true calls, summing-up to a truth set of 430 variants. Sensitivity of true-variant detection was 99% for Sanger sequencing and 97-100% for the NGS experiments. Mean false-positive rates were 3.7E-6 for Sanger sequencing, 2.5E-6 for SureSelect-NGS and 5.2E-6 for Nextera-NGS. Our findings suggest a high overall concordance between Sanger sequencing and NGS performances. Both methods demonstrated false-positive and false-negative calls. High clinical suspicion for a specific diagnosis should, therefore, override negative results of either Sanger sequencing or NGS.

摘要

下一代测序测试通常作为临床首选测试。然而,作为一种替代靶向基因(s) 桑格测序的单一测试,外显子组测序的系统性能比较仍然缺乏。性能比较数据对于临床病例管理至关重要。在这项研究中,我们比较了使用两种外显子组测序富集试剂盒:Agilent-SureSelectQXT 和 Illumina-Nextera,对单个个体的白细胞和口腔衍生 DNA 进行的桑格测序和下一代测序 (NGS) 的结果。所有 258 个基因总共测序了 11 次(使用不同的测序方法和 DNA 来源)。桑格测序完成了所有外显子,包括侧翼 ± 8 bp 区域。对于 258 个基因,NGS 的平均覆盖率分别超过了 SureSelect 和 Nextera 靶向区域的 98%和 91%以上。总体而言,在至少一个实验中鉴定了 449 个变体,并且所有变体都检测到了 407/449(90.6%)。在 42 个不一致的变体中,有 23 个被确定为真实变体,总共有 430 个变体的真实变体集合。桑格测序检测真实变体的灵敏度为 99%,NGS 实验的灵敏度为 97-100%。桑格测序的平均假阳性率为 3.7E-6,SureSelect-NGS 为 2.5E-6,Nextera-NGS 为 5.2E-6。我们的研究结果表明,桑格测序和 NGS 性能之间具有高度的总体一致性。两种方法都表现出假阳性和假阴性的结果。因此,对于特定诊断的高临床怀疑应该超过桑格测序或 NGS 的阴性结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验