| Literature DB >> 27129388 |
Sunshin Kim1, HeeJung Jung2, Sung Hee Han3, SeungJae Lee2, JeongSub Kwon2, Min Gyun Kim4, Hyungsik Chu5, Hongliang Chen6, Kyudong Han7, Hwanjong Kwak8, Sunghoon Park8, Hee Jae Joo8, Byung Chul Kim9, Jong Bhak10,11,12,13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to detect fetal aneuploidy using next-generation sequencing on ion semiconductor platforms has become common. There are several sequencers that can generate sufficient DNA reads for NIPT. However, the approval criteria vary among platforms and countries. This can delay the introduction of such devices and systems to clinics. A comparison of the sensitivity and specificity of two different platforms using the same sequencing chemistry could be useful in NIPT for fetal chromosomal aneuploidies. This would improve healthcare authorities' confidence in decision-making on sequencing-based tests.Entities:
Keywords: Circulating fetal DNA; Genome; Non-invasive prenatal testing; Sequencing; Trisomy
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27129388 PMCID: PMC4851803 DOI: 10.1186/s12920-016-0182-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Genomics ISSN: 1755-8794 Impact factor: 3.063
Demographic characteristics. Demographic characteristics of 101 pregnant women in Mirae & Heemang, Namujungwon, and GN hospitals in Korea
| Demographic characteristics | Euploid ( | T21 ( |
| Total ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maternal age, years, mean ± SD | 35.55 ± 3.63 | 33.40 ± 3.64 | 35.45 ± 3.64 | |
| ≥35 years (%) | 59 (61.46) | 1(20.00) | 60 (59.41) | |
| NIPT during gestational week 11–13 (%) | 67 (69.79) | 3 (60.0) | 70 (69.31) | |
| NIPT during gestational week 14–18 (%) | 29 (30.21) | 2 (40.0) | 31 (30.69) | |
| PGM, z-score of chr21 (min, max) | −3.46, 2.07 | 5.50, 9.43 | <0.0001† | −3.46, 9.43 |
| Proton, z-score of chr21 (min, max) | −2.32, 2.10 | 6.20, 8.86 | <0.0001† | −2.32, 8.96 |
T21 Trisomy 21, SD standard deviation, NIPT non-invasive prenatal testing. P values from †Student’s t-test
Fig. 1Dot diagrams. Interactive dot diagrams of trisomy 21 for PGM and Proton sequencers showing the minimal z-scores
Fig. 2Z-score comparison between PGM and Proton platforms using identical samples
Positive and negative predictive values. The positive and negative predictive values of the NIPT results for fetal trisomy 21 for the PGM and Proton sequencers used in this study
| Chip | Positive predictive value (95 % CI) | Negative predictive value (95 % CI) |
|---|---|---|
| 318 of PGM | 100.0 % (47.8–100.0 %) | 100.0 % (96.2–100.0 %) |
| PI of Proton | 100.0 % (47.8–100.0 %) | 100.0 % (96.2–100.0 %) |
Comparison of both Ion chips. Comparison of PGM and Proton semiconductor-based Ion chips using five different factors
| Chip type | Total reads | Read mapped ratio | Mean read length | Phred quality score (≥Q20) | Correlation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | SD/average | Average | SD | Average | SD | Average | SD | Coefficient | Significance | |
| 318 of PGM | 4512893 | 0.2823 | 99.078 | 0.6635 | 147.871 | 10.693 | 0.8611 | 0.0374 | 0.9704 |
|
| PI of Proton | 7572314 | 0.1837 | 99.011 | 1.1470 | 147.842 | 5.669 | 0.8537 | 0.0225 | 0.9813 |
|
SD standard deviation