Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Mar 11;11(1):5697.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85182-w.

Sanger sequencing is no longer always necessary based on a single-center validation of 1109 NGS variants in 825 clinical exomes

Affiliations

Sanger sequencing is no longer always necessary based on a single-center validation of 1109 NGS variants in 825 clinical exomes

A Arteche-López et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Despite the improved accuracy of next-generation sequencing (NGS), it is widely accepted that variants need to be validated using Sanger sequencing before reporting. Validation of all NGS variants considerably increases the turnaround time and costs of clinical diagnosis. We comprehensively assessed this need in 1109 variants from 825 clinical exomes, the largest sample set to date assessed using Illumina chemistry reported. With a concordance of 100%, we conclude that Sanger sequencing can be very useful as an internal quality control, but not so much as a verification method for high-quality single-nucleotide and small insertion/deletions variants. Laboratories might validate and establish their own thresholds before discontinuing Sanger confirmation studies. We also expand and validate 23 copy number variations detected by exome sequencing in 20 samples, observing a concordance of 95.65% (22/23).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Validation process in the present study. (*) Samples with discordance encountered during the Sanger validation.

References

    1. Matthijs G, et al. Guidelines for diagnostic next-generation sequencing. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2016;24:2–5. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.226. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee H, et al. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA. 2014;312:1880–1887. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.14604. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yang Y, et al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013;369:1502–1511. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1306555. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nelson AC, et al. Criteria for clinical reporting of variants from a broad target capture NGS assay without Sanger verification. JSM Biomark. 2015;2:1005.
    1. Yohe S, et al. Clinical validation of targeted next-generation sequencing for inherited disorders. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2015;139:204–210. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2013-0625-OA. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources