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
. 2024 Mar 3;17(1):62.
doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-06723-w.

Genetic sex validation for sample tracking in next-generation sequencing clinical testing

Collaborators, Affiliations

Genetic sex validation for sample tracking in next-generation sequencing clinical testing

Jianhong Hu et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Objective: Data from DNA genotyping via a 96-SNP panel in a study of 25,015 clinical samples were utilized for quality control and tracking of sample identity in a clinical sequencing network. The study aimed to demonstrate the value of both the precise SNP tracking and the utility of the panel for predicting the sex-by-genotype of the participants, to identify possible sample mix-ups.

Results: Precise SNP tracking showed no sample swap errors within the clinical testing laboratories. In contrast, when comparing predicted sex-by-genotype to the provided sex on the test requisition, we identified 110 inconsistencies from 25,015 clinical samples (0.44%), that had occurred during sample collection or accessioning. The genetic sex predictions were confirmed using additional SNP sites in the sequencing data or high-density genotyping arrays. It was determined that discrepancies resulted from clerical errors (49.09%), samples from transgender participants (3.64%) and stem cell or bone marrow transplant patients (7.27%) along with undetermined sample mix-ups (40%) for which sample swaps occurred prior to arrival at genome centers, however the exact cause of the events at the sampling sites resulting in the mix-ups were not able to be determined.

Keywords: Clinical testing; Next-generation sequencing (NGS); SNP genotyping; Sex concordance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

JH, DM, MM, RAG, DMM disclose that the Baylor Genetics Laboratory is co-owned by Baylor College of Medicine. EV is cofounder of Codified Genomics, which provides variant interpretation services. DM has received consulting fees from Illumina. The remaining authors disclose they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
eMERGE sample processing workflow. Steps indicating where aliquots of DNA are taken from samples that are presented to the Clinical DNA Sequencing Laboratory for accession, to test via the Fluidigm 96-SNP panel assay. Data from the Fluidigm 96-SNP panel assay are compared with DNA sequence data from the DNA sequencing pipeline as a quality control step, ahead of the Automated Clinical Reporting step
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Scatter plot analysis of 96-SNP panel reveals sample contamination. Scatter plot analysis from vendor software, showing a normal DNA male sample (A) or a contaminated sample containing a mixture of male and female DNAs (B). Panels 1–3 SNPs on X chromosome; panels 4–6 SNPs on Y chromosome; panels 7–9 autosomal SNPs. Each panel shows the data from a single SNP, as compared to clusters from all other SNPs. Clusters are shown as either homozygous (red or green), or heterozygous (blue) positions. In panels B2, 3, 7–9 single SNPS are represented as outside the expected (arrows) resulting in erroneous or ‘no-call’ from the software

Update of

References

    1. Norton N, Li D, Hershberger RE. Next-generation sequencing to identify genetic causes of cardiomyopathies. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2012;27(3):214–220. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e328352207e. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ku CS, Cooper DN, Polychronakos C, Naidoo N, Wu M, Soong R. Exome sequencing: dual role as a discovery and diagnostic tool. Ann Neurol. 2012;71(1):5–14. doi: 10.1002/ana.22647. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Reid JG, Bainbridge MN, Willis A, Ward PA, Braxton A, Beuten J, Xia F, Niu Z, et al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of Mendelian disorders. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(16):1502–1511. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1306555. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hayeems RZ, Dimmock D, Bick D, Belmont JW, Green RC, Lanpher B, Jobanputra V, Mendoza R, Kulkarni S, Grove ME, et al. Clinical utility of genomic sequencing: a measurement toolkit. NPJ Genom Med. 2020;5(1):56. doi: 10.1038/s41525-020-00164-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hammerling JA. A review of medical errors in laboratory diagnostics and where we are today. Lab Med. 2012;43(2):41–44. doi: 10.1309/LM6ER9WJR1IHQAUY. - DOI