High-throughput sequencing in mutation detection: A new generation of genotoxicity tests?

Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis

Volumn 776, Issue , 2015, Pages 136-143

  Maslov, Alexander Y ^a   Quispe Tintaya, Wilber ^a   Gorbacheva, Tatyana ^a,b   White, Ryan R ^a   Vijg, Jan ^a  

^a ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b VORONEZH STATE UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Genetic toxicology; Genome rearrangement; Mutagenicity; Mutation; Next generation sequencing

Indexed keywords

BIOASSAY; CIRCLE SEQUENCING; DNA DETERMINATION; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTOXICITY; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; HUMAN; INDEL MUTATION; MUTAGENICITY; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING; NONHUMAN; POINT MUTATION; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SOMATIC MUTATION; ANIMAL; DNA DAMAGE; MUTATION; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALIA;

ANIMALS; DNA DAMAGE; DNA MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; MUTATION;

EID: 84938749103     PISSN: 00275107     EISSN: 18792871     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2015.03.014     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Maslov A.Y., Vijg J. Genome instability, cancer and aging. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2009, 1790(10):963-969.
2. Veltman J.A., Brunner H.G. De novo mutations in human genetic disease. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2012, 13(8):565-575.
3. Poon S.L., et al. Mutation signatures of carcinogen exposure: genome-wide detection and new opportunities for cancer prevention. Genome Med. 2014, 6(3):24.
4. Hoeijmakers J.H. DNA damage, aging, and cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009, 361(15):1475-1485.
5. Vijg J., Suh Y. Genome instability and aging. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2013, 75:645-668.
6. McCann J., et al. Detection of carcinogens as mutagens in the Salmonella/microsome test: assay of 300 chemicals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1975, 72(12):5135-5139.
7. Galloway S.M., et al. Development of a standard protocol for in vitro cytogenetic testing with Chinese hamster ovary cells: comparison of results for 22 compounds in two laboratories. Environ. Mutagen. 1985, 7(1):1-51.
8. Mitchell A.D., Rudd C.J., Caspary W.J. Evaluation of the L5178Y mouse lymphoma cell mutagenesis assay: intralaboratory results for sixty-three coded chemicals tested at SRI International. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 1988, 12(Suppl. 13):37-101.
9. Schmid W. The micronucleus test. Mutat. Res. 1975, 31(1):9-15.
10. Fenech M. The in vitro micronucleus technique. Mutat. Res. 2000, 455(1-2):81-95.
11. Gossen J.A., et al. Efficient rescue of integrated shuttle vectors from transgenic mice: a model for studying mutations in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1989, 86(20):7971-7975.
12. Vijg J., van Steeg H. Transgenic assays for mutations and cancer: current status and future perspectives. Mutat. Res. 1998, 400(1-2):337-354.
13. Garcia A.M., et al. A model system for analyzing somatic mutations in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat. Methods 2007, 4(5):401-403.
14. Dolle M.E., et al. Evaluation of a plasmid-based transgenic mouse model for detecting in vivo mutations. Mutagenesis 1996, 11(1):111-118.
15. Sanger F., Nicklen S., Coulson A.R. DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1977, 74(12):5463-5467.
16. Kanagawa T. Bias and artifacts in multitemplate polymerase chain reactions (PCR). J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2003, 96(4):317-323.
17. Shibutani S., Takeshita M., Grollman A.P. Insertion of specific bases during DNA synthesis past the oxidation-damaged base 8-oxodG. Nature 1991, 349(6308):431-434.
18. Stiller M., et al. Patterns of nucleotide misincorporations during enzymatic amplification and direct large-scale sequencing of ancient DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103(37):13578-13584.
19. Junemann S., et al. Updating benchtop sequencing performance comparison. Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 31(4):294-296.
20. Schmitt M.W., et al. Detection of ultra-rare mutations by next-generation sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109(36):14508-14513.
21. Quail M.A., Swerdlow H., Turner D.J. Improved protocols for the illumina genome analyzer sequencing system. Curr. Protoc. Hum. Genet. 2009, (Chapter 18: Unit 18.2).
22. Gundry M., et al. Direct, genome-wide assessment of DNA mutations in single cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40(5):2032-2040.
23. Gundry M., Vijg J. Direct mutation analysis by high-throughput sequencing: from germline to low-abundant, somatic variants. Mutat. Res. 2012, 729(1-2):1-15.
24. Dean F.B., et al. Rapid amplification of plasmid and phage DNA using Phi 29 DNA polymerase and multiply-primed rolling circle amplification. Genome Res. 2001, 11(6):1095-1099.
25. Dean F.B., et al. Comprehensive human genome amplification using multiple displacement amplification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99(8):5261-5266.
26. Panelli S., et al. Towards the analysis of the genomes of single cells: further characterisation of the multiple displacement amplification. Gene 2006, 372:1-7.
27. Geigl J.B., Speicher M.R. Single-cell isolation from cell suspensions and whole genome amplification from single cells to provide templates for CGH analysis. Nat. Protoc. 2007, 2(12):3173-3184.
28. Dear P.H. One by one: single molecule tools for genomics. Brief Funct. Genomic Proteomic 2003, 1(4):397-416.
29. Russell W.L., et al. Specific-locus test shows ethylnitrosourea to be the most potent mutagen in the mouse. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1979, 76(11):5818-5819.
30. Hrabe de Angelis M.H., et al. Genome-wide, large-scale production of mutant mice by ENU mutagenesis. Nat. Genet. 2000, 25(4):444-447.
31. Altshuler D., et al. An SNP map of the human genome generated by reduced representation shotgun sequencing. Nature 2000, 407(6803):513-516.
32. Kinde I., et al. Detection and quantification of rare mutations with massively parallel sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108(23):9530-9535.
33. McCloskey M.L., et al. Encoding PCR products with batch-stamps and barcodes. Biochem. Genet. 2007, 45(11-12):761-767.
34. Thomas D.C., et al. Fidelity of mammalian DNA replication and replicative DNA polymerases. Biochemistry 1991, 30(51):11751-11759.
35. Lou D.I., et al. High-throughput DNA sequencing errors are reduced by orders of magnitude using circle sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2013, 110(49):19872-19877.
36. Fire A., Xu S.Q. Rolling replication of short DNA circles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1995, 92(10):4641-4645.
37. Lindahl T., et al. DNA N-glycosidases: properties of uracil-DNA glycosidase from Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 1977, 252(10):3286-3294.
38. Tchou J., et al. Substrate specificity of Fpg protein. Recognition and cleavage of oxidatively damaged DNA. J. Biol. Chem. 1994, 269(21):15318-15324.
39. Inaki K., Liu E.T. Structural mutations in cancer: mechanistic and functional insights. Trends Genet. 2012, 28(11):550-559.
40. Mitelman F., Johansson B., Mertens F. The impact of translocations and gene fusions on cancer causation. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2007, 7(4):233-245.
41. Vijg J., Dolle M.E. Large genome rearrangements as a primary cause of aging. Mech. Ageing Dev. 2002, 123(8):907-915.
42. Chen K., et al. BreakDancer: an algorithm for high-resolution mapping of genomic structural variation. Nat. Methods 2009, 6(9):677-681.
43. Korbel J.O., et al. Paired-end mapping reveals extensive structural variation in the human genome. Science 2007, 318(5849):420-426.
44. Zhang J., Wang J., Wu Y. An improved approach for accurate and efficient calling of structural variations with low-coverage sequence data. BMC Bioinform. 2012, 13(Suppl. 6):S6.
45. Zhang Z.D., et al. Identification of genomic indels and structural variations using split reads. BMC Genomics 2011, 12:375.
46. Jiang Y., Wang Y., Brudno M. PRISM: pair-read informed split-read mapping for base-pair level detection of insertion, deletion and structural variants. Bioinformatics 2012, 28(20):2576-2583.
47. Rausch T., et al. DELLY: structural variant discovery by integrated paired-end and split-read analysis. Bioinformatics 2012, 28(18):i333-i339.
48. Abel H.J., Duncavage E.J. Detection of structural DNA variation from next generation sequencing data: a review of informatic approaches. Cancer Genet. 2013, 206(12):432-440.
49. Quail M.A., et al. A large genome center's improvements to the Illumina sequencing system. Nat. Methods 2008, 5(12):1005-1010.
50. Adey A., et al. Rapid, low-input, low-bias construction of shotgun fragment libraries by high-density in vitro transposition. Genome Biol. 2010, 11(12):pR119.
51. Rozowsky J., et al. PeakSeq enables systematic scoring of ChIP-seq experiments relative to controls. Nat. Biotechnol. 2009, 27(1):66-75.
52. Boerrigter M.E., et al. Plasmid-based transgenic mouse model for studying in vivo mutations. Nature 1995, 377(6550):657-659.
53. Mahabir A.G., et al. Detecting genotoxic effects of potential clastogens: an in vivo study using the transgenic lacZ plasmid and the MutaMouse model. Mutat. Res. 2008, 652(2):151-157.
54. Mirsalis J.C., Monforte J.A., Winegar R.A. Transgenic animal models for detection of in vivo mutations. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 1995, 35:145-164.
55. Mahabir A.G., et al. DNA-repair-deficient Rad54/Rad54B mice are more sensitive to clastogens than wild-type mice. Toxicol. Lett. 2008, 183(1-3):112-117.
56. Margulies M., et al. Genome sequencing in microfabricated high-density picolitre reactors. Nature 2005, 437(7057):376-380.