Literature DB >> 27863262

In Silico Proficiency Testing for Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing.

Eric J Duncavage1, Haley J Abel2, John D Pfeifer3.   

Abstract

Quality assurance for clinical next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based assays is difficult given the complex methods and the range of sequence variants such assays can detect. As the number and range of mutations detected by clinical NGS assays has increased, it is difficult to apply standard analyte-specific proficiency testing (PT). Most current proficiency testing challenges for NGS are methods-based PT surveys that use DNA from reference samples engineered to harbor specific mutations that test both sequence generation and bioinformatics analysis. These methods-based PTs are limited by the number and types of mutations that can be physically introduced into a single DNA sample. In silico proficiency testing, which evaluates only the bioinformatics component of NGS assays, is a recently introduced PT method that allows for evaluation of numerous mutations spanning a range of variant classes. In silico PT data sets can be generated from simulated or actual sequencing data and are used to test alignment through variant detection and annotation steps. In silico PT has several advantages over the use of physical samples, including greater flexibility in tested variants, the ability to design laboratory-specific challenges, and lower costs. Herein, we review the use of in silico PT as an alternative to traditional methods-based PT as it is evolving in oncology applications and discuss how the approach is applicable more broadly.
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27863262     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2016.09.005

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


  9 in total

Review 1.  Reference standards for next-generation sequencing.

Authors:  Simon A Hardwick; Ira W Deveson; Tim R Mercer
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 2.  Guidelines for Validation of Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Oncology Panels: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American Pathologists.

Authors:  Lawrence J Jennings; Maria E Arcila; Christopher Corless; Suzanne Kamel-Reid; Ira M Lubin; John Pfeifer; Robyn L Temple-Smolkin; Karl V Voelkerding; Marina N Nikiforova
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 3.  Whole-Genome Sequencing of Bacterial Pathogens: the Future of Nosocomial Outbreak Analysis.

Authors:  Scott Quainoo; Jordy P M Coolen; Sacha A F T van Hijum; Martijn A Huynen; Willem J G Melchers; Willem van Schaik; Heiman F L Wertheim
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 26.132

4.  Creation of an Expert Curated Variant List for Clinical Genomic Test Development and Validation: A ClinGen and GeT-RM Collaborative Project.

Authors:  Emma Wilcox; Steven M Harrison; Edward Lockhart; Karl Voelkerding; Ira M Lubin; Heidi L Rehm; Lisa V Kalman; Birgit Funke
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2021-08-09       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 5.  The challenges of designing a benchmark strategy for bioinformatics pipelines in the identification of antimicrobial resistance determinants using next generation sequencing technologies.

Authors:  Alexandre Angers-Loustau; Mauro Petrillo; Johan Bengtsson-Palme; Thomas Berendonk; Burton Blais; Kok-Gan Chan; Teresa M Coque; Paul Hammer; Stefanie Heß; Dafni M Kagkli; Carsten Krumbiegel; Val F Lanza; Jean-Yves Madec; Thierry Naas; Justin O'Grady; Valentina Paracchini; John W A Rossen; Etienne Ruppé; Jessica Vamathevan; Vittorio Venturi; Guy Van den Eede
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2018-04-13

6.  The ICR639 CPG NGS validation series: A resource to assess analytical sensitivity of cancer predisposition gene testing.

Authors:  Shazia Mahamdallie; Elise Ruark; Esty Holt; Emma Poyastro-Pearson; Anthony Renwick; Ann Strydom; Sheila Seal; Nazneen Rahman
Journal:  Wellcome Open Res       Date:  2018-06-12

Review 7.  Prospects and challenges of implementing DNA metabarcoding for high-throughput insect surveillance.

Authors:  Alexander M Piper; Jana Batovska; Noel O I Cogan; John Weiss; John Paul Cunningham; Brendan C Rodoni; Mark J Blacket
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 6.524

8.  The Case for Laboratory Developed Procedures: Quality and Positive Impact on Patient Care.

Authors:  Karen L Kaul; Linda M Sabatini; Gregory J Tsongalis; Angela M Caliendo; Randall J Olsen; Edward R Ashwood; Sherri Bale; Robert Benirschke; Dean Carlow; Birgit H Funke; Wayne W Grody; Randall T Hayden; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Kazunori Murata; Melissa Pessin; Richard D Press; Richard B Thomson
Journal:  Acad Pathol       Date:  2017-07-16

9.  Quality Control of Next-generation Sequencing-based In vitro Diagnostic Test for Onco-relevant Mutations Using Multiplex Reference Materials in Plasma.

Authors:  Donglai Liu; Haiwei Zhou; Dawei Shi; Shu Shen; Yabin Tian; Lin Wang; Jiatao Lou; Rong Cong; Juan Lu; Henghui Zhang; Meiru Zhao; Shida Zhu; Zhisheng Cao; Ruilin Jin; Yin Wang; Xiaoni Zhang; Guohua Yang; Youchun Wang; Chuntao Zhang
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 4.207

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.