Achieving high-sensitivity for clinical applications using augmented exome sequencing

BackgroundWhole exome sequencing is increasingly used for the clinical evaluation of genetic disease, yet the variation of coverage and sensitivity over medically relevant parts of the genome remains poorly understood. Several sequencing-based assays continue to provide coverage that is inadequate for clinical assessment.MethodsUsing sequence data obtained from the NA12878 reference sample and pre-defined lists of medically-relevant protein-coding and noncoding sequences, we compared the breadth and depth of coverage obtained among four commercial exome capture platforms and whole genome sequencing. In addition, we evaluated the performance of an augmented exome strategy, ACE, that extends coverage in medically relevant regions and enhances coverage in areas that are challenging to sequence. Leveraging reference call-sets, we also examined the effects of improved coverage on variant detection sensitivity.ResultsWe observed coverage shortfalls with each of the conventional exome-capture and whole-genome platforms across several medically interpretable genes. These gaps included areas of the genome required for reporting recently established secondary findings (ACMG) and known disease-associated loci. The augmented exome strategy recovered many of these gaps, resulting in improved coverage in these areas. At clinically-relevant coverage levels (100 % bases covered at ≥20×), ACE improved coverage among genes in the medically interpretable genome (>90 % covered relative to 10-78 % with other platforms), the set of ACMG secondary finding genes (91 % covered relative to 4-75 % with other platforms) and a subset of variants known to be associated with human disease (99 % covered relative to 52-95 % with other platforms). Improved coverage translated into improvements in sensitivity, with ACE variant detection sensitivities (>97.5 % SNVs, >92.5 % InDels) exceeding that observed with conventional whole-exome and whole-genome platforms.ConclusionsClinicians should consider analytical performance when making clinical assessments, given that even a few missed variants can lead to reporting false negative results. An augmented exome strategy provides a level of coverage not achievable with other platforms, thus addressing concerns regarding the lack of sensitivity in clinically important regions. In clinical applications where comprehensive coverage of medically interpretable areas of the genome requires higher localized sequencing depth, an augmented exome approach offers both cost and performance advantages over other sequencing-based tests.

[1]  Bradley P. Coe,et al.  Copy number variation detection and genotyping from exome sequence data , 2012, Genome research.

[2]  R. Wilson,et al.  Modernizing Reference Genome Assemblies , 2011, PLoS biology.

[3]  Pablo Cingolani,et al.  © 2012 Landes Bioscience. Do not distribute. , 2022 .

[4]  Christian Gilissen,et al.  A Post‐Hoc Comparison of the Utility of Sanger Sequencing and Exome Sequencing for the Diagnosis of Heterogeneous Diseases , 2013, Human mutation.

[5]  Wei Chen,et al.  Exome sequencing helped the fine diagnosis of two siblings afflicted with atypical Timothy syndrome (TS2) , 2014, BMC Medical Genetics.

[6]  Shashikant Kulkarni,et al.  Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice , 2012, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Kelly Schoch,et al.  Clinical application of exome sequencing in undiagnosed genetic conditions , 2012, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[8]  Rena A. Godfrey,et al.  The National Institutes of Health Undiagnosed Diseases Program: insights into rare diseases , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[9]  Eric E Schadt,et al.  Analytical validation of whole exome and whole genome sequencing for clinical applications , 2014, BMC Medical Genomics.

[10]  N. Gerry,et al.  A Dynamic Database of Microarray-Characterized Cell Lines with Various Cytogenetic and Genomic Backgrounds , 2013, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[11]  J. Lupski,et al.  Exome sequencing resolves apparent incidental findings and reveals further complexity of SH3TC2 variant alleles causing Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy , 2013, Genome Medicine.

[12]  E. S. Pearson,et al.  THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL , 1934 .

[13]  Birgit Funke,et al.  College of American Pathologists' laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests. , 2015, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[14]  John G. Cleary,et al.  Joint Variant and De Novo Mutation Identification on Pedigrees from High-Throughput Sequencing Data , 2014, bioRxiv.

[15]  M. Hauser,et al.  Exome Analysis of Two Limb-Girdle Muscular Dystrophy Families: Mutations Identified and Challenges Encountered , 2012, PloS one.

[16]  B. Giusti,et al.  EXCAVATOR: detecting copy number variants from whole-exome sequencing data , 2013, Genome Biology.

[17]  Robert C. Green,et al.  Clinical Genome Sequencing , 2013 .

[18]  Alison M. Meynert,et al.  Variant detection sensitivity and biases in whole genome and exome sequencing , 2014, BMC Bioinformatics.

[19]  Martin S. Taylor,et al.  Genetic heterogeneity in Cornelia de Lange syndrome (CdLS) and CdLS-like phenotypes with observed and predicted levels of mosaicism , 2014, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[20]  J. Stockman,et al.  A Mosaic Activating Mutation in AKT1 Associated with the Proteus Syndrome , 2013 .

[21]  Euan A Ashley,et al.  Clinical interpretation and implications of whole-genome sequencing. , 2014, JAMA.

[22]  Alison M. Meynert,et al.  Quantifying single nucleotide variant detection sensitivity in exome sequencing , 2013, BMC Bioinformatics.

[23]  P. Stankiewicz,et al.  Structural variation in the human genome and its role in disease. , 2010, Annual review of medicine.

[24]  Alex M. Fichtenholtz,et al.  Development and validation of a clinical cancer genomic profiling test based on massively parallel DNA sequencing , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[25]  N. Klein,et al.  Whole-Exome Sequencing Revealing Somatic NLRP3 Mosaicism in a Patient With Chronic Infantile Neurologic, Cutaneous, Articular Syndrome , 2013, Arthritis & rheumatology.

[26]  M. DePristo,et al.  The Genome Analysis Toolkit: a MapReduce framework for analyzing next-generation DNA sequencing data. , 2010, Genome research.

[27]  Shawn W. Polson,et al.  Evaluation of a Transposase Protocol for Rapid Generation of Shotgun High-Throughput Sequencing Libraries from Nanogram Quantities of DNA , 2011, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[28]  M. Schatz,et al.  Reducing INDEL calling errors in whole genome and exome sequencing data , 2014, Genome Medicine.

[29]  Victoria M. Pratt,et al.  Cystic fibrosis population carrier screening: 2004 revision of American College of Medical Genetics mutation panel , 2004, Genetics in Medicine.

[30]  C. Walsh,et al.  Somatic mutations in cerebral cortical malformations. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  R. Altman,et al.  Pharmacogenomics Knowledge for Personalized Medicine , 2012, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[32]  R. Gibbs,et al.  Targeted enrichment beyond the consensus coding DNA sequence exome reveals exons with higher variant densities , 2011, Genome Biology.

[33]  S A Forbes,et al.  The Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) , 2008, Current protocols in human genetics.

[34]  N. Rahman,et al.  Mutations in CEP57 cause mosaic variegated aneuploidy syndrome , 2011, Nature Genetics.

[35]  J. Zook,et al.  Integrating human sequence data sets provides a resource of benchmark SNP and indel genotype calls , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[36]  M. Schatz,et al.  Accurate detection of de novo and transmitted indels within exome-capture data using micro-assembly , 2014, Nature Methods.

[37]  Jason Y. Park,et al.  Clinical exome performance for reporting secondary genetic findings. , 2015, Clinical chemistry.

[38]  E. Banks,et al.  Discovery and statistical genotyping of copy-number variation from whole-exome sequencing depth. , 2012, American journal of human genetics.

[39]  P. Stenson,et al.  The Human Gene Mutation Database: building a comprehensive mutation repository for clinical and molecular genetics, diagnostic testing and personalized genomic medicine , 2013, Human Genetics.

[40]  Ravi Vijaya Satya,et al.  Comparison of somatic mutation calling methods in amplicon and whole exome sequence data , 2014, BMC Genomics.

[41]  Joshua L. Deignan,et al.  ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[42]  Carol A. Bocchini,et al.  A new face and new challenges for Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM®) , 2011, Human mutation.

[43]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[44]  Richard Durbin,et al.  Sequence analysis Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows – Wheeler transform , 2009 .

[45]  Marc S. Williams,et al.  ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[46]  Nora Husain,et al.  The NIH genetic testing registry: a new, centralized database of genetic tests to enable access to comprehensive information and improve transparency , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[47]  A. Pagnamenta,et al.  Exome sequencing can detect pathogenic mosaic mutations present at low allele frequencies , 2011, Journal of Human Genetics.

[48]  E. Mardis Genome sequencing and cancer. , 2012, Current opinion in genetics & development.