Literature DB >> 26165824

Processed Pseudogene Confounding Deletion/Duplication Assays for SMAD4.

Alison Millson1, Tracey Lewis2, Tina Pesaran3, David Salvador3, Katrina Gillespie3, Chia-Ling Gau3, Genevieve Pont-Kingdon2, Elaine Lyon4, Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir4.   

Abstract

Mutations in SMAD4 have been associated with juvenile polyposis syndrome and combined juvenile polyposis/hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. SMAD4 is part of the SMAD gene family. To date, there has been no report in the literature of a SMAD4 pseudogene. An unusual SMAD4 duplication pattern was seen in multiple patient samples using two different duplication/deletion platforms: multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and chromosomal microarray. Follow-up confirmatory testing included real-time quantitative PCR and sequencing of an exon/exon junction, all results leading to the conclusion of the existence of a processed pseudogene. Examination of clinical results from two laboratories found a frequency of 0.26% (12 in 4672 cases) for this processed pseudogene. This is the first report of the presence of a processed pseudogene for SMAD4. We believe that knowledge of its existence is important for accurate interpretation of clinical diagnostic test results and for new assay designs. This study also indicates how a processed pseudogene may confound quantitative results, dependent on placement of probes and/or primers in a particular assay design, potentially leading to both false-positive and false-negative results. We also found that the SMAD4 processed pseudogene affects next-generation sequencing results by confounding the alignment of the sequences, resulting in erroneous variant calls. We recommend Sanger sequencing confirmation for SMAD4 variants.
Copyright © 2015 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26165824     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.05.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Diagn        ISSN: 1525-1578            Impact factor:   5.568


  8 in total

1.  Identification of prognostic molecular biomarkers in 157 HPV-positive and HPV-negative squamous cell carcinomas of the oropharynx.

Authors:  Snjezana Dogan; Bin Xu; Sumit Middha; Chad M Vanderbilt; Anita S Bowman; Jocelyn Migliacci; Luc G T Morris; Venkatraman E Seshan; Ian Ganly
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Blepharospasm in a multiplex African-American pedigree.

Authors:  Jianfeng Xiao; Misty M Thompson; Satya R Vemula; Mark S LeDoux
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 3.181

Review 3.  Overcoming challenges and dogmas to understand the functions of pseudogenes.

Authors:  Seth W Cheetham; Geoffrey J Faulkner; Marcel E Dinger
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 53.242

4.  Detection of structural variation using target captured next-generation sequencing data for genetic diagnostic testing.

Authors:  Wenbo Mu; Bing Li; Sitao Wu; Jefferey Chen; Divya Sain; Dong Xu; Mary Helen Black; Rachid Karam; Katrina Gillespie; Kelly D Farwell Hagman; Lucia Guidugli; Melissa Pronold; Aaron Elliott; Hsiao-Mei Lu
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Detecting copy number variation in next generation sequencing data from diagnostic gene panels.

Authors:  Ashish Kumar Singh; Maren Fridtjofsen Olsen; Liss Anne Solberg Lavik; Trine Vold; Finn Drabløs; Wenche Sjursen
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 3.063

6.  Development and Validation of a 34-Gene Inherited Cancer Predisposition Panel Using Next-Generation Sequencing.

Authors:  Sun Hee Rosenthal; Weimin Sun; Ke Zhang; Yan Liu; Quoclinh Nguyen; Anna Gerasimova; Camille Nery; Linda Cheng; Carolyn Castonguay; Elaine Hiller; James Li; Christopher Elzinga; David Wolfson; Alla Smolgovsky; Rebecca Chen; Arlene Buller-Burckle; Joseph Catanese; Andrew Grupe; Felicitas Lacbawan; Renius Owen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 7.  Re-recognition of pseudogenes: From molecular to clinical applications.

Authors:  Xu Chen; Lin Wan; Wei Wang; Wen-Jin Xi; An-Gang Yang; Tao Wang
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 11.556

8.  PΨFinder: a practical tool for the identification and visualization of novel pseudogenes in DNA sequencing data.

Authors:  Sanna Abrahamsson; Frida Eiengård; Anna Rohlin; Marcela Dávila López
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.169

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.