Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation: A multicenter study

Katherine B. Geiersbach, Anna E. Gardiner, Andrew Wilson, Shashirekha Shetty, Hélène Bruyère, James Zabawski, Debra F. Saxe, Rebecca Gaulin, Cynthia Williamson, Daniel L. Van Dyke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Chromosome band level is the primary quality indicator for G-banded metaphase chromosome analysis. Although current professional guidelines address the minimum necessary band level for constitutional studies, there is no study documenting the comparative performance of different band-level estimation methods. Methods: This study compared 5 band-level estimation methods (Stallard, Vancouver, Welborn, United Kingdom External Quality Assurance Scheme, and Ford) in a multicenter study in which 82 readers from 7 different clinical cytogenetics laboratories evaluated the same 10 karyotypes (5 from amniotic fluid and 5 from peripheral blood) by each method. Results: There was a 94% correlation between the five band-level estimation methods. The Welborn method yielded significantly lower scores for amniotic fluid karyotypes (P < 0.01) but not for peripheral blood karyotypes (P = 0.75). The distribution of scores obtained from different readers suggests a high level of subjectivity in chromosome band-level assessment. The variation in band-level estimation did not correlate with reader experience or study center, except for readers from one laboratory, for which the distribution of scores was significantly lower (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The results from this study suggest that the consistent use of one method is more important than the actual method employed for monitoring karyotype quality.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)170-175
Number of pages6
JournalGenetics in Medicine
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Multicenter Studies
Chromosomes
Karyotype
Amniotic Fluid
Metaphase
Cytogenetics
Guidelines

Keywords

  • band level
  • band resolution
  • chromosome analysis
  • cytogenetics
  • karyotype

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Genetics(clinical)

Cite this

Geiersbach, K. B., Gardiner, A. E., Wilson, A., Shetty, S., Bruyère, H., Zabawski, J., ... Van Dyke, D. L. (2014). Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation: A multicenter study. Genetics in Medicine, 16(2), 170-175. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.95

Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation : A multicenter study. / Geiersbach, Katherine B.; Gardiner, Anna E.; Wilson, Andrew; Shetty, Shashirekha; Bruyère, Hélène; Zabawski, James; Saxe, Debra F.; Gaulin, Rebecca; Williamson, Cynthia; Van Dyke, Daniel L.

In: Genetics in Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2014, p. 170-175.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Geiersbach, KB, Gardiner, AE, Wilson, A, Shetty, S, Bruyère, H, Zabawski, J, Saxe, DF, Gaulin, R, Williamson, C & Van Dyke, DL 2014, 'Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation: A multicenter study', Genetics in Medicine, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 170-175. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.95
Geiersbach KB, Gardiner AE, Wilson A, Shetty S, Bruyère H, Zabawski J et al. Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation: A multicenter study. Genetics in Medicine. 2014;16(2):170-175. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.95
Geiersbach, Katherine B. ; Gardiner, Anna E. ; Wilson, Andrew ; Shetty, Shashirekha ; Bruyère, Hélène ; Zabawski, James ; Saxe, Debra F. ; Gaulin, Rebecca ; Williamson, Cynthia ; Van Dyke, Daniel L. / Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation : A multicenter study. In: Genetics in Medicine. 2014 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 170-175.
@article{f3b58aec0dbd46e58440822e7df9a067,
title = "Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation: A multicenter study",
abstract = "Purpose: Chromosome band level is the primary quality indicator for G-banded metaphase chromosome analysis. Although current professional guidelines address the minimum necessary band level for constitutional studies, there is no study documenting the comparative performance of different band-level estimation methods. Methods: This study compared 5 band-level estimation methods (Stallard, Vancouver, Welborn, United Kingdom External Quality Assurance Scheme, and Ford) in a multicenter study in which 82 readers from 7 different clinical cytogenetics laboratories evaluated the same 10 karyotypes (5 from amniotic fluid and 5 from peripheral blood) by each method. Results: There was a 94{\%} correlation between the five band-level estimation methods. The Welborn method yielded significantly lower scores for amniotic fluid karyotypes (P < 0.01) but not for peripheral blood karyotypes (P = 0.75). The distribution of scores obtained from different readers suggests a high level of subjectivity in chromosome band-level assessment. The variation in band-level estimation did not correlate with reader experience or study center, except for readers from one laboratory, for which the distribution of scores was significantly lower (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The results from this study suggest that the consistent use of one method is more important than the actual method employed for monitoring karyotype quality.",
keywords = "band level, band resolution, chromosome analysis, cytogenetics, karyotype",
author = "Geiersbach, {Katherine B.} and Gardiner, {Anna E.} and Andrew Wilson and Shashirekha Shetty and H{\'e}l{\`e}ne Bruy{\`e}re and James Zabawski and Saxe, {Debra F.} and Rebecca Gaulin and Cynthia Williamson and {Van Dyke}, {Daniel L.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1038/gim.2013.95",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "170--175",
journal = "Genetics in Medicine",
issn = "1098-3600",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Subjectivity in chromosome band-level estimation

T2 - A multicenter study

AU - Geiersbach, Katherine B.

AU - Gardiner, Anna E.

AU - Wilson, Andrew

AU - Shetty, Shashirekha

AU - Bruyère, Hélène

AU - Zabawski, James

AU - Saxe, Debra F.

AU - Gaulin, Rebecca

AU - Williamson, Cynthia

AU - Van Dyke, Daniel L.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Purpose: Chromosome band level is the primary quality indicator for G-banded metaphase chromosome analysis. Although current professional guidelines address the minimum necessary band level for constitutional studies, there is no study documenting the comparative performance of different band-level estimation methods. Methods: This study compared 5 band-level estimation methods (Stallard, Vancouver, Welborn, United Kingdom External Quality Assurance Scheme, and Ford) in a multicenter study in which 82 readers from 7 different clinical cytogenetics laboratories evaluated the same 10 karyotypes (5 from amniotic fluid and 5 from peripheral blood) by each method. Results: There was a 94% correlation between the five band-level estimation methods. The Welborn method yielded significantly lower scores for amniotic fluid karyotypes (P < 0.01) but not for peripheral blood karyotypes (P = 0.75). The distribution of scores obtained from different readers suggests a high level of subjectivity in chromosome band-level assessment. The variation in band-level estimation did not correlate with reader experience or study center, except for readers from one laboratory, for which the distribution of scores was significantly lower (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The results from this study suggest that the consistent use of one method is more important than the actual method employed for monitoring karyotype quality.

AB - Purpose: Chromosome band level is the primary quality indicator for G-banded metaphase chromosome analysis. Although current professional guidelines address the minimum necessary band level for constitutional studies, there is no study documenting the comparative performance of different band-level estimation methods. Methods: This study compared 5 band-level estimation methods (Stallard, Vancouver, Welborn, United Kingdom External Quality Assurance Scheme, and Ford) in a multicenter study in which 82 readers from 7 different clinical cytogenetics laboratories evaluated the same 10 karyotypes (5 from amniotic fluid and 5 from peripheral blood) by each method. Results: There was a 94% correlation between the five band-level estimation methods. The Welborn method yielded significantly lower scores for amniotic fluid karyotypes (P < 0.01) but not for peripheral blood karyotypes (P = 0.75). The distribution of scores obtained from different readers suggests a high level of subjectivity in chromosome band-level assessment. The variation in band-level estimation did not correlate with reader experience or study center, except for readers from one laboratory, for which the distribution of scores was significantly lower (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The results from this study suggest that the consistent use of one method is more important than the actual method employed for monitoring karyotype quality.

KW - band level

KW - band resolution

KW - chromosome analysis

KW - cytogenetics

KW - karyotype

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898440410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84898440410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/gim.2013.95

DO - 10.1038/gim.2013.95

M3 - Article

C2 - 23887773

AN - SCOPUS:84898440410

VL - 16

SP - 170

EP - 175

JO - Genetics in Medicine

JF - Genetics in Medicine

SN - 1098-3600

IS - 2

ER -