Occult specimen contamination in routine clinical next-generation sequencing testing

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 144, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 667-674

  Sehn, Jennifer K ^a   Spencer, David H ^a   Pfeifer, John D ^a   Bredemeyer, Andrew J ^a   Cottrell, Catherine E ^a   Abel, Haley J ^a   Duncavage, Eric J ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer; DNA contamination; Health care quality assurance; Next generation sequencing; Quality improvement; Specimen provenance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOINFORMATICS; BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION; DNA CONTAMINATION; GENE LINKAGE DISEQUILIBRIUM; GENE LOCUS; HAPLOTYPE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MICROSATELLITE MARKER; NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT TANDEM REPEAT; GENETICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

DNA CONTAMINATION; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY, MOLECULAR;

EID: 84947793247     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: 19437722     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1309/AJCPR88WDJJLDMBN     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Rossi D, Khiabanian H, Spina V, et al. Clinical impact of small TP53 mutated subclones in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 2014;123:2139-2147.
2. Cottrell CE, Al-Kateb H, Bredemeyer AJ, et al. Validation of a next-generation sequencing assay for clinical molecular oncology. J Mol Diagn. 2014;16:89-105.
3. Pritchard CC, Salipante SJ, Koehler K, et al. Validation and implementation of targeted capture and sequencing for the detection of actionable mutation, copy number variation, and gene rearrangement in clinical cancer specimens. J Mol Diagn. 2014;16:56-67.
4. Spencer DH, Tyagi M, Vallania F, et al. Performance of common analysis methods for detecting low-frequency single nucleotide variants in targeted next-generation sequence data. J Mol Diagn. 2014;16:75-88.
5. Yachida S, Jones S, Bozic I, et al. Distant metastasis occurs late during the genetic evolution of pancreatic cancer. Nature. 2010;467:1114-1117.
6. Gerlinger M, Rowan AJ, Horswell S, et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:883-892.
7. Pfeifer JD, Liu J. Rate of occult specimen provenance complications in routine clinical practice. Am J Clin Pathol. 2013;139:93-100.
8. Dunn EJ, Moga PJ. Patient misidentification in laboratory medicine: a qualitative analysis of 227 root cause analysis reports in the Veterans Health Administration. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:244-255.
9. Gephardt GN, Zarbo RJ. Extraneous tissue in surgical pathology: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 275 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1996;120:1009-1014.
10. Platt E, Sommer P, McDonald L, et al. Tissue floaters and contaminants in the histology laboratory. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:973-978.
11. Marberger M, McConnell JD, Fowler I, et al. Biopsy misidentification identified by DNA profiling in a large multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1744-1749.
12. Valenstein PN, Raab SS, Walsh MK; College of American Pathologists. Identification errors involving clinical laboratories: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of patient and specimen identification errors at 120 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1106-1113.
13. Nakhleh RE, Idowu MO, Souers RJ, et al. Mislabeling of cases, specimens, blocks, and slides: a College of American Pathologists study of 136 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135:969-974.
14. Platt E, Sommer P, McDonald L, et al. Tissue floaters and contaminants in the histology laboratory. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:973-978.
15. College of American Pathologists, Commission on Laboratory Accreditation. Molecular Pathology Checklist. April 21, 2014 edition. Northfield, IL: College of American Pathologists; 2014.
16. Rehm HL, Bale SJ, Bayrak-Toydemir P, et al. ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing. Genet Med. 2013;15:733-747.
17. Tworek JA, Volmar KE, McCall SJ, et al. Q-probes studies in anatomic pathology: quality improvement through targeted benchmarking. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138:1156-1166.
18. Nakhleh RE, Souers RJ, Bashleben CP, et al. Fifteen years' experience of a College of American Pathologists program for continuous monitoring and improvement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138:1150-1155.
19. Sehn JK, Hagemann IS, Pfeifer JD, et al. Diagnostic utility of targeted next-generation sequencing in problematic cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:534-541.
20. Abecasis GR, Auton A, Brooks LD, et al. An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature. 2012;491:56-65.
21. Sherry ST, Ward MH, Kholodov M, et al. dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001;29:308-311.
22. Pfeifer JD, Zehnbauer B, Payton J. The changing spectrum of DNA-based specimen provenance testing in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;135:132-138.
23. Jun G, Flickinger M, Hetrick KN, et al. Detecting and estimating contamination of human DNA samples in sequencing and array-based genotype data. Am J Hum Genet. 2012;91:839-848.
24. Pengelly RJ, Gibson J, Andreoletti G, et al. A SNP profiling panel for sample tracking in whole-exome sequencing studies. Genome Med. 2013;5:89.
25. Cibulskis K, McKenna A, Fennell T, et al. ContEst: estimating cross-contamination of human samples in next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:2601-2602.
26. Debeljak M, Freed DN, Welch JA, et al. Haplotype counting by next-generation sequencing for ultrasensitive human DNA detection. J Mol Diagn. 2014;16:495-503.