TY - JOUR
T1 - Confirming variants in next-generation sequencing panel testing by sanger sequencing
AU - Baudhuin, Linnea M.
AU - Lagerstedt, Susan A.
AU - Klee, Eric W.
AU - Fadra, Numrah
AU - Oglesbee, Devin
AU - Ferber, Matthew J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by funds from the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology.
PY - 2015/7/1
Y1 - 2015/7/1
N2 - Current clinical laboratory practice guidelines for next-generation sequencing (NGS) do not provide definitive guidance on confirming NGS variants. Sanger confirmation of NGS results can be inefficient, redundant, and expensive. We evaluated the accuracy of NGS-detected single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and insertion/deletion variants (indels) and the necessity of NGS variant confirmation using four NGS target-capture gene panels covering 117 genes, 568 Kbp, and 77 patient DNA samples. Unique NGS-detected variants (1080 SNVs and 124 indels) underwent Sanger confirmation and/or were compared to data from the 1000 Genomes Project (1000G). Recurrent variants in unrelated samples resulted in 919 comparisons between NGS and Sanger, with 100% concordance. In a second comparison, 762 unique NGS results (736 SNVs, 26 indels) from seven 1000G samples were found to have 97.1% concordance with 1000G phase 1 data. Sanger sequencing and 1000G phase 3 data confirmed the accuracy of the NGS results for all 1000G phase 1 discrepancies. In all samples, the depth of coverage exceeded 100× in >99.7% of bases in the target regions. In conclusion, confirmatory analysis by Sanger sequencing of SNVs detected via capture-based NGS testing that meets appropriate quality thresholds is unnecessarily redundant. In contrast, Sanger sequencing for indels may be required for defining the correct genomic location, and Sanger may be used for quality-assurance purposes.
AB - Current clinical laboratory practice guidelines for next-generation sequencing (NGS) do not provide definitive guidance on confirming NGS variants. Sanger confirmation of NGS results can be inefficient, redundant, and expensive. We evaluated the accuracy of NGS-detected single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and insertion/deletion variants (indels) and the necessity of NGS variant confirmation using four NGS target-capture gene panels covering 117 genes, 568 Kbp, and 77 patient DNA samples. Unique NGS-detected variants (1080 SNVs and 124 indels) underwent Sanger confirmation and/or were compared to data from the 1000 Genomes Project (1000G). Recurrent variants in unrelated samples resulted in 919 comparisons between NGS and Sanger, with 100% concordance. In a second comparison, 762 unique NGS results (736 SNVs, 26 indels) from seven 1000G samples were found to have 97.1% concordance with 1000G phase 1 data. Sanger sequencing and 1000G phase 3 data confirmed the accuracy of the NGS results for all 1000G phase 1 discrepancies. In all samples, the depth of coverage exceeded 100× in >99.7% of bases in the target regions. In conclusion, confirmatory analysis by Sanger sequencing of SNVs detected via capture-based NGS testing that meets appropriate quality thresholds is unnecessarily redundant. In contrast, Sanger sequencing for indels may be required for defining the correct genomic location, and Sanger may be used for quality-assurance purposes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84931337923&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84931337923&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.03.004
DO - 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.03.004
M3 - Article
C2 - 25960255
AN - SCOPUS:84931337923
SN - 1525-1578
VL - 17
SP - 456
EP - 461
JO - Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
JF - Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
IS - 4
ER -