z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Performance comparison: exome sequencing as a single test replacing Sanger sequencing
Author(s) -
Hila Fridman,
Concetta Bormans,
Moshe Einhorn,
Daniel Au,
Arjan Bormans,
Yuval Porat,
Luisa Fernanda Sanchez,
Brent Manning,
Ephrat LevyLahad,
Doron M. Behar
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
molecular genetics and genomics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.921
H-Index - 120
eISSN - 1617-4615
pISSN - 1617-4623
DOI - 10.1007/s00438-021-01772-3
Subject(s) - sanger sequencing , exome sequencing , biology , dna sequencing , genetics , exome , massive parallel sequencing , computational biology , personal genomics , gene , genomics , mutation , genome
Next generation sequencing tests are used routinely as first-choice tests in the clinic. However, systematic performance comparing the results of exome sequencing as a single test replacing Sanger sequencing of targeted gene(s) is still lacking. Performance comparison data are critically important for clinical case management. In this study, we compared Sanger-sequencing results of 258 genes to those obtained from next generation sequencing (NGS) using two exome-sequencing enrichment kits: Agilent-SureSelectQXT and Illumina-Nextera. Sequencing was performed on leukocytes and buccal-derived DNA from a single individual, and all 258 genes were sequenced a total of 11 times (using different sequencing methods and DNA sources). Sanger sequencing was completed for all exons, including flanking ± 8 bp regions. For the 258 genes, NGS mean coverage was > 20 × for > 98 and > 91% of the regions targeted by SureSelect and Nextera, respectively. Overall, 449 variants were identified in at least one experiment, and 407/449 (90.6%) were detected by all. Of the 42 discordant variants, 23 were determined as true calls, summing-up to a truth set of 430 variants. Sensitivity of true-variant detection was 99% for Sanger sequencing and 97-100% for the NGS experiments. Mean false-positive rates were 3.7E-6 for Sanger sequencing, 2.5E-6 for SureSelect-NGS and 5.2E-6 for Nextera-NGS. Our findings suggest a high overall concordance between Sanger sequencing and NGS performances. Both methods demonstrated false-positive and false-negative calls. High clinical suspicion for a specific diagnosis should, therefore, override negative results of either Sanger sequencing or NGS.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom