Dataset Information

Benchmarking of Whole Exome Sequencing and Ad Hoc Designed Panels for Genetic Testing of Hereditary Cancer.

ABSTRACT: Next generation sequencing panels have been developed for hereditary cancer, although there is some debate about their cost-effectiveness compared to exome sequencing. The performance of two panels is compared to exome sequencing. Twenty-four patients were selected: ten with identified mutations (control set) and fourteen suspicious of hereditary cancer but with no mutation (discovery set). TruSight Cancer (94 genes) and a custom panel (122 genes) were assessed alongside exome sequencing. Eighty-three genes were targeted by the two panels and exome sequencing. More than 99% of bases had a read depth of over 30x in the panels, whereas exome sequencing covered 94%. Variant calling with standard settings identified the 10 mutations in the control set, with the exception of MSH6 c.255dupC using TruSight Cancer. In the discovery set, 240 unique non-silent coding and canonic splice-site variants were identified in the panel genes, 7 of them putatively pathogenic (in ATM, BARD1, CHEK2, ERCC3, FANCL, FANCM, MSH2). The three approaches identified a similar number of variants in the shared genes. Exomes were more expensive than panels but provided additional data. In terms of cost and depth, panels are a suitable option for genetic diagnostics, although exomes also identify variants in non-targeted genes.

SUBMITTER: Feliubadalo L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5209723 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Benchmarking of Whole Exome Sequencing and Ad Hoc Designed Panels for Genetic Testing of Hereditary Cancer.

Feliubadaló Lídia L Tonda Raúl R Gausachs Mireia M Trotta Jean-Rémi JR Castellanos Elisabeth E López-Doriga Adriana A Teulé Àlex À Tornero Eva E Del Valle Jesús J Gel Bernat B Gut Marta M Pineda Marta M González Sara S Menéndez Mireia M Navarro Matilde M Capellá Gabriel G Gut Ivo I Serra Eduard E Brunet Joan J Beltran Sergi S Lázaro Conxi C

Scientific reports 20170104

Next generation sequencing panels have been developed for hereditary cancer, although there is some debate about their cost-effectiveness compared to exome sequencing. The performance of two panels is compared to exome sequencing. Twenty-four patients were selected: ten with identified mutations (control set) and fourteen suspicious of hereditary cancer but with no mutation (discovery set). TruSight Cancer (94 genes) and a custom panel (122 genes) were assessed alongside exome sequencing. Eighty ...[more]

PMID: 28050010

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe E-cadherin gene, CDH1, and the α-E-catenin gene, CTNNA1, were previously identified as hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) susceptibility genes, explaining 25% to 50% of HDGC cases. The genetic basis underlying disease susceptibility in the remaining 50% to 75% of patients with HDGC is still unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the incidence rate of CDH1 germline alterations in HDGC, identify new susceptibility genes that can be used for screening of HDGC, and provide a genetic landscape for HDGC.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study conducted retrospective whole-exome and targeted sequencing of 284 leukocyte samples and 186 paired tumor samples from Chinese patients with HDGC over a long follow-up period (median, 21.7 [range, 0.6-185.9] months). Among 10 431 patients diagnosed with gastric cancer between January 1, 2002, and August 31, 2018, 284 patients who met the criteria for HDGC were included. Data were analyzed from August 1 to 30, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresIncidence rate of CDH1 germline alterations, identification of new HDGC susceptibility genes, and genetic landscape of HDGC.ResultsAmong 284 Chinese patients, 161 (56.7%) were female, and the median age was 35 (range, 20-75) years. The frequency of CDH1 germline alterations was 2.8%, whereas the frequency of CDH1 somatic alterations was 25.3%. The genes with the highest incidence (>10%) of private germline alterations (including insertions and deletions) in the HDGC cohort were MUC4, ABCA13, ZNF469, FCGBP, IGFN1, RNF213, and SSPO, whereas previously reported germline alterations of CTNNA1, BRCA2, STK11, PRSS1, ATM, MSR1, PALB2, BRCA1, and RAD51C were observed at low frequencies (median, 4 [range, 1-12] cases). Furthermore, enrichment of the somatic variant signature of exposure to aflatoxin suggested potential interaction between genetics and environment in HDGC. Double-hit events in genes such as CACNA1D were observed, which suggested that these events might serve as important mechanisms for HDGC tumorigenesis. In addition, germline variants of FSIP2, HSPG2, and NCKAP5 and somatic alterations of FGFR3, ASPSCR1, CIC, DGCR8, and LZTR1 were associated with poor overall survival among patients with HDGC.Conclusions and relevanceThis study provided a genetic landscape for HDGC. The study's findings challenged the previously reported high germline alteration rate of CDH1 in HDGC and identified new potential susceptibility genes. Analyses of variant signatures and double-hit events revealed potentially important mechanisms for HDGC tumorigenesis. Findings from the present study may provide helpful information for further investigations of HDGC.

Project description:Background:Extraordinary progress has been made in our understanding of common variants in many diseases, including melanoma. Because the contribution of rare coding variants is not as well characterized, we performed an exome-wide, gene-based association study of familial cutaneous melanoma (CM) and ocular melanoma (OM). Methods:Using 11?990 jointly processed individual DNA samples, whole-exome sequencing was performed, followed by large-scale joint variant calling using GATK (Genome Analysis ToolKit). PLINK/SEQ was used for statistical analysis of genetic variation. Four models were used to estimate the association among different types of variants. In vitro functional validation was performed using three human melanoma cell lines in 2D and 3D proliferation assays. In vivo tumor growth was assessed using xenografts of human melanoma A375 melanoma cells in nude mice (eight mice per group). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results:Strong signals were detected for CDKN2A (Pmin = 6.16?×?10-8) in the CM cohort (n?=?273) and BAP1 (Pmin = 3.83?×?10-6) in the OM (n?=?99) cohort. Eleven genes that exhibited borderline association (P < 10-4) were independently validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas melanoma cohort (379?CM, 47 OM) and a matched set of 3563 European controls with CDKN2A (P = .009), BAP1 (P = .03), and EBF3 (P = 4.75?×?10-4), a candidate risk locus, all showing evidence of replication. EBF3 was then evaluated using germline data from a set of 132 familial melanoma cases and 4769 controls of UK origin (joint P = 1.37?×?10-5). Somatically, loss of EBF3 expression correlated with progression, poorer outcome, and high MITF tumors. Functionally, induction of EBF3 in melanoma cells reduced cell growth in vitro, retarded tumor formation in vivo, and reduced MITF levels. Conclusions:The results of this large rare variant germline association study further define the mutational landscape of hereditary melanoma and implicate EBF3 as a possible CM predisposition gene.

Project description:PurposeTo identify susceptibility genes associated with hereditary predisposition to uveal melanoma (UM) in patients with no detectable germline BAP1 alterations.DesignRetrospective case series from academic referral centers.ParticipantsCohort of 154 UM patients with high risk of hereditary cancer defined as patients with 1 or more of the following: (1) familial UM, (2) young age (<35 years) at diagnosis, (3) personal history of other primary cancers, and (4) family history of 2 or more primary cancers with no detectable mutation or deletion in BAP1 gene.MethodsWhole exome sequencing, a cancer gene panel, or both were carried out. Probands included 27 patients with familial UM, 1 patient with bilateral UM, 1 patient with congenital UM, and 125 UM patients with strong personal or family histories, or both, of cancer. Functional validation of variants was carried out by immunohistochemistry, reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and genotyping.Main outcome measuresClinical characterization of UM patients with germline alterations in known cancer genes.ResultsWe identified actionable pathogenic variants in 8 known hereditary cancer predisposition genes (PALB2, MLH1, MSH6, CHEK2, SMARCE1, ATM, BRCA1, and CTNNA1) in 9 patients, including 3 of 27 patients (11%) with familial UM and 6 of 127 patients (4.7%) with a high risk for cancer. Two patients showed pathogenic variants in CHEK2 and PALB2, whereas variants in the other genes each occurred in 1 patient. Biallelic inactivation of PALB2 and MLH1 was observed in tumors from the respective patients. The frequencies of pathogenic variants in PALB2, MLH1, and SMARCE1 in UM patients were significantly higher than the observed frequencies in noncancer controls (PALB2: P = 0.02; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-30.6; MLH1: P = 0.04; odds ratio, 25.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-143; SMARCE1: P = 0.001; odds ratio, 2047; 95% confidence interval, 52-4.5e15, respectively).ConclusionsThe study provided moderate evidence of gene and disease association of germline mutations in PALB2 and MLH1 with hereditary predisposition to UM. It also identified several other candidate susceptibility genes. The results suggest locus heterogeneity in predisposition to UM. Genetic testing for hereditary predisposition to cancer is warranted in UM patients with strong personal or family history of cancers, or both.

Dataset Information

Benchmarking of Whole Exome Sequencing and Ad Hoc Designed Panels for Genetic Testing of Hereditary Cancer.

Publications

Benchmarking of Whole Exome Sequencing and Ad Hoc Designed Panels for Genetic Testing of Hereditary Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets