A model study of in silico proficiency testing for clinical next-generation sequencing

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 140, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 1085-1091

  Duncavage, Eric J ^a   Abel, Haley J ^a   Merker, Jason D ^b   Bodner, John B ^c   Zhao, Qin ^d   Voelkerding, Karl V ^e   Pfeifer, John D ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c Laboratory Improvement Program   (United States)

^d Molecular Pathology Division   (United States)

^e ARUP LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ALLELE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; GENE FREQUENCY; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; MUTATION; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM;

ALLELES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; GENE FREQUENCY; GENETIC TESTING; GENOME, HUMAN; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; LABORATORY PROFICIENCY TESTING; MUTATION; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84990191322     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2016-0194-CP     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Gargis AS, Kalman L, Berry MW, et al. Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice. Nat Biotechnol. 2012; 30(11):1033-1036.
2. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, 42 USC §201 (1988).
3. US Department of Health and Human Services: Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988; final rules and notice. 42 CFR §493. Fed Reg. 1992;57:7188-7288.
4. Schrijver I, Aziz N, Jennings LJ, Richards CS, Voelkerding KV, Weck KE. Methods-based proficiency testing in molecular genetic pathology. J Mol Diagn. 2014;16(3):283-287.
5. Lanza AM, Dyess TJ, Alper HS. Using the Cre/lox system for targeted integration into the human genome: loxFAS-loxP pairing and delayed introduction of Cre DNA improve gene swapping efficiency. Biotechnol J. 2012;7(7):898-908.
6. Joung Jk, Sander JD. Innovation: TALENs: a widely applicable technology for targeted genome editing. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2013;14(1):49-55.
7. Urnov FD, Rebar EJ, Holmes MC, Zhang HS, Gregory PD. Genome editing with engineered zinc finger nucleases. Nat Rev Genet. 2010;11(9):636-646.
8. McKenna A, Hanna M, Banks E, et al. The Genome Analysis Toolkit: a MapReduce framework for analyzing next-generation DNA sequencing data. Genome Res. 2010;20(9):1297-1303.
9. DePristo MA, Banks E, Poplin R, et al. A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data. Nat Genet. 2011; 43(5):491-498.
10. University of California Santa Cruz Genome Bioinformatics. Sequence and annotation downloads. http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/downloads. html#human. Accessed April 24, 2016.
11. The Broad Institute. Picard. http://broadinstitute.github.io/picard/. Accessed April 24, 2016.
12. Palomaki GE, Richards CE. Assessing the analytic validity of molecular testing for Huntington disease using data from an external proficiency testing survey. Genet Med. 2012;14(1):69-75.
13. Weck KE, Zehnbauer B, Datto M, Schrijver I. Molecular genetic testing for fragile X syndrome: laboratory performance on the College of American Pathologists proficiency surveys (2001-2009). Genet Med. 2012;14(3):306-312.
14. Feldman GL, Schrijver I, Lyon E, Palomaki GE. Results of the College of American Pathology/American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics external proficiency testing from 2006 to 2013 for three conditions prevalent in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Genet Med. 2014;16(9):695-702.
15. Hudson KL, Murphy JA, Kaufman DJ, Javitt GH, Katsanis SH, Scott J. Oversight of US genetic testing laboratories. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24(9):1083-1090.
16. Richards CS, Palomaki GE, Lacbawan FL, Lyon E, Feldman GL. Three-year experience of a CAP/ACMG methods-based external proficiency testing program for laboratories offering DNA sequencing for rare inherited disorders. Genet Med. 2014;16(1):25-32.
17. Zook JM, Samarov D, McDaniel J, Sen SK, Salit M. Synthetic spike-in standards improve run-specific systematic error analysis for DNA and RNA sequencing. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41356. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041356.
18. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA): Genetic Testing Reference Materials Coordination Program (GeT-RM)-home. http://wwwn.cdc.gov/clia/Resources/GetRM/default. aspx. Accessed April 24, 2016.
19. National Institute of Standards and Technology. National Measurement Laboratory: standard reference materials, SRM order request summary. http://www.nist.gov/srm/index.cfm. Accessed April 24, 2016.
20. Mardis ER. The $1, 000 genome, the $100, 000 analysis? Genome Med. 2010;2(11):84.
21. 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(1):56-67.
22. 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(1):75-88.
23. Spencer DH, Abel HJ, Lockwood CM, et al. Detection of FLT3 internal tandem duplication in targeted, short-read-length, next-generation sequencing data. J Mol Diagn. 2013;15(1):81-93.
24. Sharma MK, Phillips J, Agarwal S, et al. Clinical genomicist workstation. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2013;2013:156-157. eCollection 2013.
25. Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAM-tools. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(16):2078-2079.
26. Kalman LV, Lubin IM, Barker S, et al. Current landscape and new paradigms of proficiency testing and external quality assessment for molecular genetics. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(7):983-988.
27. Frampton M, Houlston R. Generation of artificial FASTQ files to evaluate the performance of next generation sequencing pipelines. PLoS One. 2012;7(11): e49110. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049110.
28. Food and Drug Administration. Precision FDA. https://precision.fda.gov/. Accessed April 24, 2016.