Evaluation of an amplicon-based next-generation sequencing panel for detection of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic variants
The recent advances in the next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology have enabled fast, accurate, and cost-effective genetic testing. Here, we evaluated the performance of a targeted NGS panel for BRCA1/2 sequencing and confirmed its applicability in routine clinical diagnostics. We tested samples from 88 patients using the TruSeq custom panel (Illumina Inc, USA) and a MiSeq sequencer (Illumina) and compared the results to the outcomes of conventional Sanger sequencing. All 1015 sequence variations identified by Sanger sequencing were detected by NGS, except for one missense variant that might have been missed due to a rare mutation on a primer-binding site. One deletion variation, c.1909 + 12delT of BRCA2, was falsely called in all samples due to a homopolymer error. In addition, seven different single-nucleotide substitutions with low variant frequencies (range: 16.2–33.3 %) were falsely called by NGS. In a separate batch, 10 different false-positive variations were found in five samples. The overall sensitivity and positive predictive value of NGS were estimated to be 99.9 and 87.5 %, respectively. The false-positive results could be excluded by setting quality and alternative allele ratio filters and/or by visual inspection using the IGV software. Targeted NGS panel for BRCA1 and BRCA2 showed an excellent agreement with Sanger sequencing results. We therefore conclude that this NGS panel can be used for routine diagnostic method in a clinical genetic laboratory.
KeywordsNext-generation sequencing BRCA1 BRCA2 TruSeq MiSeq Targeted sequencing
This study was supported by a grant from the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (NRF-2012R1A1A2043879), and by a grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2015R1C1A2A01055967).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Sikkema-Raddatz B, Johansson LF, de Boer EN, Almomani R, Boven LG, van den Berg MP, van Spaendonck-Zwarts KY, van Tintelen JP, Sijmons RH, Jongbloed JD et al (2013) Targeted next-generation sequencing can replace Sanger sequencing in clinical diagnostics. Hum Mutat 34(7):1035–1042CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Feliubadalo L, Lopez-Doriga A, Castellsague E, del Valle J, Menendez M, Tornero E, Montes E, Cuesta R, Gomez C, Campos O et al (2013) Next-generation sequencing meets genetic diagnostics: development of a comprehensive workflow for the analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Eur J Hum Genet 21(8):864–870CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Trujillano D, Weiss ME, Schneider J, Koster J, Papachristos EB, Saviouk V, Zakharkina T, Nahavandi N, Kovacevic L, Rolfs A (2015) Next-generation sequencing of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes for the genetic diagnostics of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. J Mol Diagn 17(2):162–170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Mullins FM, Dietz L, Lay M, Zehnder JL, Ford J, Chun N, Schrijver I (2007) Identification of an intronic single nucleotide polymorphism leading to allele dropout during validation of a CDH1 sequencing assay: implications for designing polymerase chain reaction-based assays. Genet Med 9(11):752–760CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar