The clinical utility of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for a diverse range of targets is expanding, increasing the need for multiplexed analysis of both DNA and RNA. However, translation into daily ...use requires a rigorous and comprehensive validation strategy. The aim of this clinical validation was to assess the performance of the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (IonPGM
™
) and validate the Oncomine
™
Focus DNA and RNA Fusion panels for clinical application in solid tumour testing of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue. Using a mixture of routine FFPE and reference material across a variety of tissue and specimen types, we sequenced 86 and 31 samples on the Oncomine
™
Focus DNA and RNA Fusion assays, respectively. This validation considered a number of parameters including the clinical robustness of the bioinformatics pipeline for variant detection and interpretation. The Oncomine
™
Focus DNA assay had a sample and variant-based sensitivity of 99.1 and 97.1%, respectively, and an assay specificity of 100%. The Oncomine
™
Focus Fusion panel had a good sensitivity and specificity based upon the samples assessed, however requires further validation to confirm findings due to limited sample numbers. We observed a good sequencing performance based upon amplicon, gene (hotspot variants within gene) and sample specific analysis with 92% of clinical samples obtaining an average amplicon coverage above 500X. Detection of some indels was challenging for the routine IonReporter
™
workflow; however, the addition of NextGENe® software improved indel identification demonstrating the importance of both bench and bioinformatic validation. With an increasing number of clinically actionable targets requiring a variety of methodologies, NGS provides a cost-effective and time-saving methodology to assess multiple targets across different modalities. We suggest the use of multiple analysis software to ensure identification of clinically applicable variants.
Background Circulating cell free DNA (cfDNA) testing of plasma for EGFR somatic variants in lung cancer patients is being widely implemented and with any new service, external quality assessment ...(EQA) is required to ensure patient safety. An international consortium, International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath), has delivered a second round of assessment to measure the accuracy of cfDNA testing for lung cancer and the interpretation of the results. Methods A collaboration of five EQA provider organisations, all members of IQNPath, have delivered the assessment during 2018-19 to a total of 264 laboratories from 45 countries. Bespoke plasma reference material containing a range of EGFR mutations at varying allelic frequencies were supplied to laboratories for testing and reporting according to routine procedures. The genotyping accuracy and clinical reporting was reviewed against standardised criteria and feedback was provided to participants. Results The overall genotyping error rate in the EQA was found to be 11.1%. Low allelic frequency samples were the most challenging and were not detected by some testing methods, resulting in critical genotyping errors. This was reflected in higher false negative rates for samples with variant allele frequencies (VAF) rates less than 1.5% compared to higher frequencies. A sample with two different EGFR mutations gave inconsistent detection of both mutations. However, for one sample, where two variants were present at a VAF of less than 1% then both mutations were correctly detected in 145/263 laboratories. Reports often did not address the risk that tumour DNA may have not been tested and limitations of the methodologies provided by participants were insufficient. This was reflected in the average interpretation score for the EQA being 1.49 out of a maximum of 2. Conclusions The variability in the standard of genotyping and reporting highlighted the need for EQA and educational guidance in this field to ensure the delivery of high-quality clinical services where testing of cfDNA is the only option for clinical management. Keywords: Lung cancer, NSCLC, cfDNA, EGFR EQA, Mutation testing
Results of clinical genomic testing must be reported in a clear, concise format to ensure they are understandable and interpretable. It is important laboratories are aware of the information which is ...essential to make sure the results are not open to misinterpretation. As genomic testing has continued to evolve over the past decade, the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) recommendations for reporting results of diagnostic genetic testing (biochemical, cytogenetic and molecular genetic) published in 2014 have been reviewed and updated to provide the genomic community with guidance on reporting unambiguous results.
Repeat expansion disorders affect about 1 in 3000 individuals and are clinically heterogeneous diseases caused by expansions of short tandem DNA repeats. Genetic testing is often locus-specific, ...resulting in underdiagnosis of people who have atypical clinical presentations, especially in paediatric patients without a previous positive family history. Whole genome sequencing is increasingly used as a first-line test for other rare genetic disorders, and we aimed to assess its performance in the diagnosis of patients with neurological repeat expansion disorders.
We retrospectively assessed the diagnostic accuracy of whole genome sequencing to detect the most common repeat expansion loci associated with neurological outcomes (AR, ATN1, ATXN1, ATXN2, ATXN3, ATXN7, C9orf72, CACNA1A, DMPK, FMR1, FXN, HTT, and TBP) using samples obtained within the National Health Service in England from patients who were suspected of having neurological disorders; previous PCR test results were used as the reference standard. The clinical accuracy of whole genome sequencing to detect repeat expansions was prospectively examined in previously genetically tested and undiagnosed patients recruited in 2013–17 to the 100 000 Genomes Project in the UK, who were suspected of having a genetic neurological disorder (familial or early-onset forms of ataxia, neuropathy, spastic paraplegia, dementia, motor neuron disease, parkinsonian movement disorders, intellectual disability, or neuromuscular disorders). If a repeat expansion call was made using whole genome sequencing, PCR was used to confirm the result.
The diagnostic accuracy of whole genome sequencing to detect repeat expansions was evaluated against 793 PCR tests previously performed within the NHS from 404 patients. Whole genome sequencing correctly classified 215 of 221 expanded alleles and 1316 of 1321 non-expanded alleles, showing 97·3% sensitivity (95% CI 94·2–99·0) and 99·6% specificity (99·1–99·9) across the 13 disease-associated loci when compared with PCR test results. In samples from 11 631 patients in the 100 000 Genomes Project, whole genome sequencing identified 81 repeat expansions, which were also tested by PCR: 68 were confirmed as repeat expansions in the full pathogenic range, 11 were non-pathogenic intermediate expansions or premutations, and two were non-expanded repeats (16% false discovery rate).
In our study, whole genome sequencing for the detection of repeat expansions showed high sensitivity and specificity, and it led to identification of neurological repeat expansion disorders in previously undiagnosed patients. These findings support implementation of whole genome sequencing in clinical laboratories for diagnosis of patients who have a neurological presentation consistent with a repeat expansion disorder.
Medical Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care, National Health Service England, National Institute for Health Research, and Illumina.
Molecular analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is becoming increasingly important in clinical treatment decisions. A pilot External Quality Assessment (EQA) scheme for ctDNA analysis was ...organized by four European EQA providers under the umbrella organization IQN Path, in order to investigate the feasibility of delivering an EQA to assess the detection of clinically relevant variants in plasma circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and to analyze reporting formats.
Thirty-two experienced laboratories received 5 samples for EGFR mutation analysis and/or 5 samples for KRAS and NRAS mutation analysis. Samples were artificially manufactured to contain 3 mL of human plasma with 20 ng/mL of fragmented ctDNA and variants at allelic frequencies of 1 and 5%.
The scheme error rate was 20.1%. Higher error rates were observed for RAS testing when compared to EGFR analysis, for allelic frequencies of 1% compared to 5%, and for cases including 2 different variants. The reports over-interpreted wild-type results and frequently failed to comment on the amount of cfDNA extracted.
The pilot scheme demonstrated the feasibility of delivering a ctDNA EQA scheme and the need for such a scheme due to high error rates in detecting low frequency clinically relevant variants. Recommendations to improve reporting of cfDNA are provided.
Prenatal trio exome sequencing (ES) has become integrated into the care for pregnant women when the fetus has structural anomalies. Details regarding optimizing indications for prenatal exome ...sequencing, its detection rates with different categories of fetal anomalies, and principles of interpretation of pathogenicity of sequence variants are still under investigation. However, there is now growing consensus about its benefits for finding the cause of fetal structural anomalies. What is not established, is whether exome or genome sequencing (GS) has a place in the care of all pregnant women. This report is a summary of the debate on this topic at the 26th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy. Both expert debaters considered the advantages and disadvantages. Advantages include the ability to diagnose serious childhood conditions without a prenatally observable phenotype, which creates the potential of early treatments. Disadvantages include difficulties with variant classification, counseling complexities, healthcare cost, and the burden on healthcare systems and families, in particular with the discovery of adult‐onset disorders or variants of uncertain significance. Although both debaters weighed the balance of these conflicting arguments differently, they agreed that more research is needed to further explore the clinical utility and ethical aspects of GS for all pregnant women.
Key points
What is already known about this topic?
Prenatal exome sequencing (pES) has a significant incremental diagnostic yield over karyotype and chromosomal microarray (CMA) in cases with structural fetal anomalies.
Emerging evidence shows that genome sequencing (GS) has a higher diagnostic yield for single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and expansion mutations compared to ES, as well as superior detection of copy number variants (CNVs) compared to CMA.
What does this study add?
The debaters discuss potential benefits and pitfalls of offering pGS to all pregnant patients.
ABSTRACT
The recommendations for the description of sequence variants from the Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS) were published in 2000. Over the years, the recommendations became widely adopted, ...especially in human clinical genetics and DNA laboratory reporting. As part of a testing scheme performed by the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Scheme (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics, we assessed the current variability in the use and interpretation of the guidelines by diagnostic laboratories based across the globe. Twenty‐six participating laboratories gave 21 different descriptions. Six laboratories gave fully compliant HGVS descriptions, 12 laboratories reported the correct variant, although not using the recommended format, whilst eight laboratory reports (31%) were not correct. The results indicate that available tools to check variant descriptions were not used. We conclude that education appears to be the way forward to eliminate the observed variability in data reporting.
Clinical validity assessments of gene-disease associations underpin analysis and reporting in diagnostic genomics, and yet wide variability exists in practice, particularly in use of these ...assessments for virtual gene panel design and maintenance. Harmonization efforts are hampered by the lack of agreed terminology, agreed gene curation standards, and platforms that can be used to identify and resolve discrepancies at scale. We undertook a systematic comparison of the content of 80 virtual gene panels used in two healthcare systems by multiple diagnostic providers in the United Kingdom and Australia. The process was enabled by a shared curation platform, PanelApp, and resulted in the identification and review of 2,144 discordant gene ratings, demonstrating the utility of sharing structured gene-disease validity assessments and collaborative discordance resolution in establishing national and international consensus.
Clinical validity assessments of gene-disease associations underpin analysis and reporting in diagnostic genomics, and yet wide variability exists in practice, particularly in use of these assessments for virtual gene panel design and maintenance. Harmonization efforts are hampered by the lack of agreed terminology, agreed gene curation standards, and platforms that can be used to identify and resolve discrepancies at scale. We undertook a systematic comparison of the content of 80 virtual gene panels used in two healthcare systems by multiple diagnostic providers in the United Kingdom and Australia. The process was enabled by a shared curation platform, PanelApp, and resulted in the identification and review of 2,144 discordant gene ratings, demonstrating the utility of sharing structured gene-disease validity assessments and collaborative discordance resolution in establishing national and international consensus.