Performance characterization of PCR-free whole genome sequencing for clinical diagnosis
Ningzhi ZhangiD, Meizhen Zhou, Fanwei ZengiD, Xiaodan WangiD, Fengxia LiuiD, Zhihong QiaoiD, Chunna Fan, Yaoshen WangiD, Zhonghai Fang, Wentao DaiiD, Jiale XiangiD, Jun SuniD, Zhiyu PengiD, Lijie SongiD, Yan SuniD
Abstract
PurposeTo evaluate the performance of PCR-free whole genome sequencing (WGS) for clinical diagnosis, and thereby revealing how experimental parameters affect variant detection. MethodsAll the 5 NA12878 samples were sequenced using MGISEQ-2000. NA12878 samples underwent WGS with differing DNA input and library preparation protocol (PCR-based versus PCR-free protocols for library preparation). The DP (depth of coverage) and GQ (genotype quality) of each sample were compared. We developed a systematic WGS pipeline for the analysis of down-sampling samples of the 5 NA12878 samples. The performance of each sample was measured for sensitivity, coverage of depth and breadth of coverage of disease-related genes and CNVs. ResultsIn general, NA12878-2 (PCR-free WGS) showed better DP and GQ distribution than NA12878-1 (PCR-based WGS). With a mean depth of ~40X, the sensitivity of homozyous and heterozygous SNPs of NA12878-2 showed higher sensitivity (>99.77% and > 99.82%) than NA12878-1, and positive predictive value (PPV) exceeded 99.98% and 99.07%. The sensitivity and PPV of homozygous and heterozygous indels for NA12878-2 (PCR-free WGS) showed great improvement than NA128878-1. The breadths of coverage for disease-related genes and CNVs are slightly better for samples with PCR-free library preparation protocol than the sample with PCR-based library preparation protocol. DNA input also influences the performance of variant detection in samples with PCR-free WGS. ConclusionDifferent experimental parameters may affect variant detection for clinical WGS. Clinical scientists should know the range of sensitivity of variants for different methods of WGS, which would be useful when interpreting and delivering clinical reports.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 2
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Advanced Whole Genome Sequencing Using an Entirely PCR-free Massively Parallel Sequencing Workflow
Hanjie Shen, Pengjuan Liu, … Radoje Drmanac·bioRxiv·Dec 20, 2019
- Characterizing sensitivity and coverage of clinical WGS as a diagnostic test for genetic disorders
Yan Sun, Fengxia Liu, … Zhiyu Peng·BMC Medical GenomicsPeer-reviewed·Apr 13, 2021
- Accuracy of somatic variant detection workflows for whole genome sequencing experiments
Roman Jaksik, Jacek Rosiak, … Paweł Sztromwasser·bioRxiv·Jun 10, 2021
- Clinical validation of Whole Genome Sequencing for cancer diagnostics
Paul Roepman, Ewart de Bruijn, … Edwin P. J. G. Cuppen·Journal of Molecular DiagnosticsPeer-reviewed·May 6, 2021
- Benchmarking of Germline Copy Number Variant Callers from Whole Genome Sequencing Data for Clinical Applications
Francisco M. De La Vega, Sean A. Irvine, … James Han·Bioinformatics AdvancesPeer-reviewed·Dec 26, 2024
- Benchmarking long-read variant sensitivity across ONT and PacBio platforms using known clinically reported variants in a cohort of critically ill newborns
Colby T. Marvin, Joseph M. Devaney, … Jessica X. Chong·medRxiv·Jul 10, 2026