Confirming variants in next-generation sequencing panel testing by sanger sequencing

Linnea M. Baudhuin, Susan A. Lagerstedt, Eric W Klee, Numrah Fadra, Devin Oglesbee, Matthew J. Ferber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)456-461
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Molecular Diagnostics
Volume17
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2015

Fingerprint

Genome
Nucleotides
Practice Guidelines
Genes
DNA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Molecular Medicine
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Confirming variants in next-generation sequencing panel testing by sanger sequencing. / Baudhuin, Linnea M.; Lagerstedt, Susan A.; Klee, Eric W; Fadra, Numrah; Oglesbee, Devin; Ferber, Matthew J.

In: Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, Vol. 17, No. 4, 01.07.2015, p. 456-461.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Baudhuin, Linnea M. ; Lagerstedt, Susan A. ; Klee, Eric W ; Fadra, Numrah ; Oglesbee, Devin ; Ferber, Matthew J. / Confirming variants in next-generation sequencing panel testing by sanger sequencing. In: Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2015 ; Vol. 17, No. 4. pp. 456-461.
@article{aa32ad4348b04b298c8802c4b8bc3303,
title = "Confirming variants in next-generation sequencing panel testing by sanger sequencing",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Baudhuin, {Linnea M.} and Lagerstedt, {Susan A.} and Klee, {Eric W} and Numrah Fadra and Devin Oglesbee and Ferber, {Matthew J.}",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.03.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "456--461",
journal = "Journal of Molecular Diagnostics",
issn = "1525-1578",
publisher = "Association of Molecular Pathology",
number = "4",

}

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.

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

VL - 17

SP - 456

EP - 461

JO - Journal of Molecular Diagnostics

JF - Journal of Molecular Diagnostics

SN - 1525-1578

IS - 4

ER -