Development and analytical validation of a 25-gene next generation sequencing panel that includes the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to assess hereditary cancer risk

被引:92
作者
Judkins, Thaddeus [1 ]
Leclair, Benoit
Bowles, Karla [1 ]
Gutin, Natalia [1 ]
Trost, Jeff [1 ]
McCulloch, James [1 ]
Bhatnagar, Satish [2 ]
Murray, Adam [1 ]
Craft, Jonathan [1 ]
Wardell, Bryan [2 ]
Bastian, Mark [2 ]
Mitchell, Jeffrey [2 ]
Chen, Jian [2 ]
Tran, Thanh [2 ]
Williams, Deborah [2 ]
Potter, Jennifer [2 ]
Jammulapati, Srikanth [2 ]
Perry, Michael [2 ]
Morris, Brian [2 ]
Roa, Benjamin [1 ]
Timms, Kirsten [2 ]
机构
[1] Myriad Genet Labs Inc, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 USA
[2] Myriad Genet Inc, Salt Lake City, UT USA
来源
BMC CANCER | 2015年 / 15卷
关键词
Next generation sequencing; Hereditary cancer; BRCA1; BRCA2; GENOMIC CAPTURE; MUTATIONS; OVARIAN; STANDARDS; BREAST; MLH1;
D O I
10.1186/s12885-015-1224-y
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Germline DNA mutations that increase the susceptibility of a patient to certain cancers have been identified in various genes, and patients can be screened for mutations in these genes to assess their level of risk for developing cancer. Traditional methods using Sanger sequencing focus on small groups of genes and therefore are unable to screen for numerous genes from several patients simultaneously. The goal of the present study was to validate a 25-gene panel to assess genetic risk for cancer in 8 different tissues using next generation sequencing (NGS) techniques. Methods: Twenty-five genes associated with hereditary cancer syndromes were selected for development of a panel to screen for risk of these cancers using NGS. In an initial technical assessment, NGS results for BRCA1 and BRCA2 were compared with Sanger sequencing in 1864 anonymized DNA samples from patients who had undergone previous clinical testing. Next, the entire gene panel was validated using parallel NGS and Sanger sequencing in 100 anonymized DNA samples. Large rearrangement analysis was validated using NGS, microarray comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification analyses (MLPA). Results: NGS identified 15,877 sequence variants, while Sanger sequencing identified 15,878 in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 comparison study of the same regions. Based on these results, the NGS process was refined prior to the validation of the full gene panel. In the validation study, NGS and Sanger sequencing were 100% concordant for the 3,923 collective variants across all genes for an analytical sensitivity of the NGS assay of >99.92% (lower limit of 95% confidence interval). NGS, microarray CGH and MLPA correctly identified all expected positive and negative large rearrangement results for the 25-gene panel. Conclusion: This study provides a thorough validation of the 25-gene NGS panel and indicates that this analysis tool can be used to collect clinically significant information related to risk of developing hereditary cancers.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Prediction of MLH1 and MSH2 mutations in Lynch syndrome
    Balmana, Judith
    Stockwell, David H.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    Stoffel, Elena M.
    Deffenbaugh, Amie M.
    Reid, Julia E.
    Ward, Brian
    Scholl, Thomas
    Hendrickson, Brant
    Tazelaar, John
    Burbidge, Lynn Anne
    Syngal, Sapna
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2006, 296 (12): : 1469 - 1478
  • [2] Next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes
    Castera, Laurent
    Krieger, Sophie
    Rousselin, Antoine
    Legros, Angelina
    Baumann, Jean-Jacques
    Bruet, Olivia
    Brault, Baptiste
    Fouillet, Robin
    Goardon, Nicolas
    Letac, Olivier
    Baert-Desurmont, Stephanie
    Tinat, Julie
    Bera, Odile
    Dugast, Catherine
    Berthet, Pascaline
    Polycarpe, Florence
    Layet, Valerie
    Hardouin, Agnes
    Frebourg, Thierry
    Vaur, Dominique
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2014, 22 (11) : 1305 - 1313
  • [3] Gene Panel Testing for Inherited Cancer Risk
    Hall, Michael J.
    Forman, Andrea D.
    Pilarski, Robert
    Wiesner, Georgia
    Giri, Veda N.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2014, 12 (09): : 1339 - 1346
  • [4] Harland M, 2000, GENE CHROMOSOME CANC, V28, P45, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2264(200005)28:1<45::AID-GCC6>3.0.CO
  • [5] 2-F
  • [6] Cancer Risk Assessment Using Genetic Panel Testing: Considerations for Clinical Application
    Hiraki, Susan
    Rinella, Erica S.
    Schnabel, Freya
    Oratz, Ruth
    Ostrer, Harry
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2014, 23 (04) : 604 - 617
  • [7] Dominantly Inherited Constitutional Epigenetic Silencing of MLH1 in a Cancer-Affected Family Is Linked to a Single Nucleotide Variant within the 5′UTR
    Hitchins, Megan P.
    Rapkins, Robert W.
    Kwok, Chau-To
    Srivastava, Sameer
    Wong, Justin J. L.
    Khachigian, Levon M.
    Polly, Patsie
    Goldblatt, Jack
    Ward, Robyn L.
    [J]. CANCER CELL, 2011, 20 (02) : 200 - 213
  • [8] Kazazian HA, 2000, GENET MED, V2, P302
  • [9] Klee EW, 2011, EXPERT REV MOL DIAGN, V11, P703, DOI [10.1586/ERM.11.58, 10.1586/erm.11.58]
  • [10] Clinical Evaluation of a Multiple-Gene Sequencing Panel for Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment
    Kurian, Allison W.
    Hare, Emily E.
    Mills, Meredith A.
    Kingham, Kerry E.
    McPherson, Lisa
    Whittemore, Alice S.
    McGuire, Valerie
    Ladabaum, Uri
    Kobayashi, Yuya
    Lincoln, Stephen E.
    Cargill, Michele
    Ford, James M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (19) : 2001 - 2009