外显子组测序
索引
拷贝数变化
遗传学
全基因组测序
计算生物学
DNA测序
生物
遗传变异
工作流程
基因组
医学
突变
单核苷酸多态性
基因型
计算机科学
基因
数据库
作者
Gaby Schobers,Ronny Derks,Amber den Ouden,Hilde Swinkels,Jeroen van Reeuwijk,Ermanno Bosgoed,Dorien Lugtenberg,Su Ming Sun,Jordi Corominas Galbany,Marjan M. Weiss,Marinus J. Blok,Richelle A. C. M. Olde Keizer,Tom Hofste,Debby M.E.I. Hellebrekers,Nicole de Leeuw,Alexander P.A. Stegmann,Erik‐Jan Kamsteeg,Aimée Paulussen,Marjolijn J. L. Ligtenberg,Xiangqun Zheng-Bradley
标识
DOI:10.1186/s13073-024-01301-y
摘要
Abstract Background To diagnose the full spectrum of hereditary and congenital diseases, genetic laboratories use many different workflows, ranging from karyotyping to exome sequencing. A single generic high-throughput workflow would greatly increase efficiency. We assessed whether genome sequencing (GS) can replace these existing workflows aimed at germline genetic diagnosis for rare disease. Methods We performed short-read GS (NovaSeq™6000; 150 bp paired-end reads, 37 × mean coverage) on 1000 cases with 1271 known clinically relevant variants, identified across different workflows, representative of our tertiary diagnostic centers. Variants were categorized into small variants (single nucleotide variants and indels < 50 bp), large variants (copy number variants and short tandem repeats) and other variants (structural variants and aneuploidies). Variant calling format files were queried per variant, from which workflow-specific true positive rates (TPRs) for detection were determined. A TPR of ≥ 98% was considered the threshold for transition to GS. A GS-first scenario was generated for our laboratory, using diagnostic efficacy and predicted false negative as primary outcome measures. As input, we modeled the diagnostic path for all 24,570 individuals referred in 2022, combining the clinical referral, the transition of the underlying workflow(s) to GS, and the variant type(s) to be detected. Results Overall, 95% (1206/1271) of variants were detected. Detection rates differed per variant category: small variants in 96% (826/860), large variants in 93% (341/366), and other variants in 87% (39/45). TPRs varied between workflows (79–100%), with 7/10 being replaceable by GS. Models for our laboratory indicate that a GS-first strategy would be feasible for 84.9% of clinical referrals (750/883), translating to 71% of all individuals (17,444/24,570) receiving GS as their primary test. An estimated false negative rate of 0.3% could be expected. Conclusions GS can capture clinically relevant germline variants in a ‘GS-first strategy’ for the majority of clinical indications in a genetics diagnostic lab.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI