Literature DB >> 33589468

Use of SNP chips to detect rare pathogenic variants: retrospective, population based diagnostic evaluation.

Weedon Mn1, Jackson L1, Harrison Jw1, Ruth Ks1, Tyrrell J1, Hattersley At1, Wright Cf1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the sensitivity and specificity of SNP chips are adequate for detecting rare pathogenic variants in a clinically unselected population.
DESIGN: Retrospective, population based diagnostic evaluation. PARTICIPANTS: 49 908 people recruited to the UK Biobank with SNP chip and next generation sequencing data, and an additional 21 people who purchased consumer genetic tests and shared their data online via the Personal Genome Project. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Genotyping (that is, identification of the correct DNA base at a specific genomic location) using SNP chips versus sequencing, with results split by frequency of that genotype in the population. Rare pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes were selected as an exemplar for detailed analysis of clinically actionable variants in the UK Biobank, and BRCA related cancers (breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic) were assessed in participants through use of cancer registry data.
RESULTS: Overall, genotyping using SNP chips performed well compared with sequencing; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were all above 99% for 108 574 common variants directly genotyped on the SNP chips and sequenced in the UK Biobank. However, the likelihood of a true positive result decreased dramatically with decreasing variant frequency; for variants that are very rare in the population, with a frequency below 0.001% in UK Biobank, the positive predictive value was very low and only 16% of 4757 heterozygous genotypes from the SNP chips were confirmed with sequencing data. Results were similar for SNP chip data from the Personal Genome Project, and 20/21 individuals analysed had at least one false positive rare pathogenic variant that had been incorrectly genotyped. For pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are individually very rare, the overall performance metrics for the SNP chips versus sequencing in the UK Biobank were: sensitivity 34.6%, specificity 98.3%, positive predictive value 4.2%, and negative predictive value 99.9%. Rates of BRCA related cancers in UK Biobank participants with a positive SNP chip result were similar to those for age matched controls (odds ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.71) because the vast majority of variants were false positives, whereas sequence positive participants had a significantly increased risk (odds ratio 4.05, 2.72 to 6.03).
CONCLUSIONS: SNP chips are extremely unreliable for genotyping very rare pathogenic variants and should not be used to guide health decisions without validation. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33589468      PMCID: PMC7879796          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n214

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  34 in total

1.  zCall: a rare variant caller for array-based genotyping: genetics and population analysis.

Authors:  Jacqueline I Goldstein; Andrew Crenshaw; Jason Carey; George B Grant; Jared Maguire; Menachem Fromer; Colm O'Dushlaine; Jennifer L Moran; Kimberly Chambert; Christine Stevens; Pamela Sklar; Christina M Hultman; Shaun Purcell; Steven A McCarroll; Patrick F Sullivan; Mark J Daly; Benjamin M Neale
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  Data quality control in genetic case-control association studies.

Authors:  Carl A Anderson; Fredrik H Pettersson; Geraldine M Clarke; Lon R Cardon; Andrew P Morris; Krina T Zondervan
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 3.  Guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (hereditary non-polyposis cancer).

Authors:  H F A Vasen; G Möslein; A Alonso; I Bernstein; L Bertario; I Blanco; J Burn; G Capella; C Engel; I Frayling; W Friedl; F J Hes; S Hodgson; J-P Mecklin; P Møller; F Nagengast; Y Parc; L Renkonen-Sinisalo; J R Sampson; A Stormorken; J Wijnen
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 6.318

4.  A standardized framework for the validation and verification of clinical molecular genetic tests.

Authors:  Christopher J Mattocks; Michael A Morris; Gert Matthijs; Elfriede Swinnen; Anniek Corveleyn; Els Dequeker; Clemens R Müller; Victoria Pratt; Andrew Wallace
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Harvard Personal Genome Project: lessons from participatory public research.

Authors:  Madeleine P Ball; Jason R Bobe; Michael F Chou; Tom Clegg; Preston W Estep; Jeantine E Lunshof; Ward Vandewege; Alexander Zaranek; George M Church
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 11.117

6.  Health and genetic ancestry testing: time to bridge the gap.

Authors:  Andrew Smart; Deborah A Bolnick; Richard Tutton
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 3.063

7.  Single nucleotide polymorphism arrays: a decade of biological, computational and technological advances.

Authors:  Thomas LaFramboise
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  Clinical and molecular characterisation of 300 patients with congenital hyperinsulinism.

Authors:  Ritika R Kapoor; Sarah E Flanagan; Ved Bhushan Arya; Julian P Shield; Sian Ellard; Khalid Hussain
Journal:  Eur J Endocrinol       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 6.664

9.  ClinVar: public archive of interpretations of clinically relevant variants.

Authors:  Melissa J Landrum; Jennifer M Lee; Mark Benson; Garth Brown; Chen Chao; Shanmuga Chitipiralla; Baoshan Gu; Jennifer Hart; Douglas Hoffman; Jeffrey Hoover; Wonhee Jang; Kenneth Katz; Michael Ovetsky; George Riley; Amanjeev Sethi; Ray Tully; Ricardo Villamarin-Salomon; Wendy Rubinstein; Donna R Maglott
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  The UK Biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data.

Authors:  Clare Bycroft; Colin Freeman; Desislava Petkova; Gavin Band; Lloyd T Elliott; Kevin Sharp; Allan Motyer; Damjan Vukcevic; Olivier Delaneau; Jared O'Connell; Adrian Cortes; Samantha Welsh; Alan Young; Mark Effingham; Gil McVean; Stephen Leslie; Naomi Allen; Peter Donnelly; Jonathan Marchini
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  10 in total

1.  Outpatient Primary Care Genetic Testing Primer: What to Order and Testing Considerations.

Authors:  Angela Lee; Julie Neidich; Hoanh Nguyen
Journal:  Mo Med       Date:  2022 Jul-Aug

2.  The impact of Mendelian sleep and circadian genetic variants in a population setting.

Authors:  Michael N Weedon; Samuel E Jones; Jacqueline M Lane; Jiwon Lee; Hanna M Ollila; Amy Dawes; Jess Tyrrell; Robin N Beaumont; Timo Partonen; Ilona Merikanto; Stephen S Rich; Jerome I Rotter; Timothy M Frayling; Martin K Rutter; Susan Redline; Tamar Sofer; Richa Saxena; Andrew R Wood
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 6.020

3.  Three legs of the missing heritability problem.

Authors:  Lucas J Matthews; Eric Turkheimer
Journal:  Stud Hist Philos Sci       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 1.379

4.  Returning actionable genomic results in a research biobank: Analytic validity, clinical implementation, and resource utilization.

Authors:  Carrie L Blout Zawatsky; Nidhi Shah; Kalotina Machini; Emma Perez; Kurt D Christensen; Hana Zouk; Marcie Steeves; Christopher Koch; Melissa Uveges; Janelle Shea; Nina Gold; Joel Krier; Natalie Boutin; Lisa Mahanta; Heidi L Rehm; Scott T Weiss; Elizabeth W Karlson; Jordan W Smoller; Matthew S Lebo; Robert C Green
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 5.  From pharmacogenetics to pharmaco-omics: Milestones and future directions.

Authors:  Chiara Auwerx; Marie C Sadler; Alexandre Reymond; Zoltán Kutalik
Journal:  HGG Adv       Date:  2022-03-16

6.  Rare complement factor I variants associated with reduced macular thickness and age-related macular degeneration in the UK Biobank.

Authors:  Nikolaos Tzoumas; David Kavanagh; Heather J Cordell; Andrew J Lotery; Praveen J Patel; David H Steel
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 5.121

7.  Array genotyping as diagnostic approach in medical genetics.

Authors:  Martina Witsch-Baumgartner; Gunda Schwaninger; Simon Schnaiter; Franziska Kollmann; Silja Burkhard; Rebekka Gröbner; Beatrix Mühlegger; Esther Schamschula; Peter Kirchmeier; Johannes Zschocke
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 2.473

8.  Screening for potential undiagnosed Gaucher disease patients: Utilisation of the Gaucher earlier diagnosis consensus point-scoring system (GED-C PSS) in conjunction with electronic health record data, tissue specimens, and small nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotype data available in Finnish biobanks.

Authors:  Minja Pehrsson; Hanna Heikkinen; Ulla Wartiovaara-Kautto; Sampo Mäntylahti; Pia Bäckström; Mariann I Lassenius; Kristiina Uusi-Rauva; Olli Carpén; Kaisa Elomaa
Journal:  Mol Genet Metab Rep       Date:  2022-08-27

9.  GWAS of serum ALT and AST reveals an association of SLC30A10 Thr95Ile with hypermanganesemia symptoms.

Authors:  Lucas D Ward; Ho-Chou Tu; Chelsea B Quenneville; Shira Tsour; Alexander O Flynn-Carroll; Margaret M Parker; Aimee M Deaton; Patrick A J Haslett; Luca A Lotta; Niek Verweij; Manuel A R Ferreira; Aris Baras; Gregory Hinkle; Paul Nioi
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 10.  Genomewide Association Studies in Pharmacogenomics.

Authors:  Gregory McInnes; Sook Wah Yee; Yash Pershad; Russ B Altman
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 6.875

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.