Literature DB >> 31230393

Identification of mobile retrocopies during genetic testing: Consequences for routine diagnosis.

Nicolas Chatron1,2, Kevin Cassinari3, Olivier Quenez3, Stéphanie Baert-Desurmont4, Claire Bardel5,6, Marie-Pierre Buisine7, Eduardo Calpena8, Yline Capri9, Jordi Corominas Galbany10, Flavie Diguet1,2, Patrick Edery1,2, Bertrand Isidor11, Audrey Labalme1, Cedric Le Caignec11,12, Jonathan Lévy13, François Lecoquierre4, Pierre Lindenbaum14,15, Olivier Pichon11, Pierre-Antoine Rollat-Farnier1,5, Thomas Simonet16,17, Pascale Saugier-Veber4, Anne-Claude Tabet13,18, Annick Toutain19,20, Andrew O M Wilkie8, Gaetan Lesca1,2, Damien Sanlaville1,2, Gaël Nicolas3, Caroline Schluth-Bolard1,2.   

Abstract

Human retrocopies, that is messenger RNA transcripts benefitting from the long interspersed element 1 machinery for retrotransposition, may have specific consequences for genomic testing. Next genetration sequencing (NGS) techniques allow the detection of such mobile elements but they may be misinterpreted as genomic duplications or be totally overlooked. We report eight observations of retrocopies detected during diagnostic NGS analyses of targeted gene panels, exome, or genome sequencing. For seven cases, while an exons-only copy number gain was called, read alignment inspection revealed a depth of coverage shift at every exon-intron junction where indels were also systematically called. Moreover, aberrant chimeric read pairs spanned entire introns or were paired with another locus for terminal exons. The 8th retrocopy was present in the reference genome and thus showed a normal NGS profile. We emphasize the existence of retrocopies and strategies to accurately detect them at a glance during genetic testing and discuss pitfalls for genetic testing.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  copy number gain; genetic testing pitfalls; genome mobility; retrocopies

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31230393     DOI: 10.1002/humu.23845

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Mutat        ISSN: 1059-7794            Impact factor:   4.878


  3 in total

Review 1.  mRNA Vaccines: Why Is the Biology of Retroposition Ignored?

Authors:  Tomislav Domazet-Lošo
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 4.141

2.  Multiple FGF4 Retrocopies Recently Derived within Canids.

Authors:  Kevin Batcher; Peter Dickinson; Kimberly Maciejczyk; Kristin Brzeski; Sheida Hadji Rasouliha; Anna Letko; Cord Drögemüller; Tosso Leeb; Danika Bannasch
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 4.096

3.  Comparative analyses of copy number variations between Bos taurus and Bos indicus.

Authors:  Yan Hu; Han Xia; Mingxun Li; Chang Xu; Xiaowei Ye; Ruixue Su; Mai Zhang; Oyekanmi Nash; Tad S Sonstegard; Liguo Yang; George E Liu; Yang Zhou
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.969

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.