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
. 2025 Aug 14;31(16):3512-3525.
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-2188.

A Concordance Study among 26 NGS Laboratories Participating in the NCI Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice Clinical Trial

Linda K Zane  1 Laura M Yee  1 Ting-Chia Chang  2 Jeffrey Sklar  3 Guangxiao Yang  3 Jia Di Wen  3 Peining Li  3 Robin Harrington  2 David J Sims  2 Kneshay Harper  2 Jeffrey M Trent  4 Janine R LoBello  4 Szabolcs Szelinger  4 Kasey Benson  5 Jia Zeng  5 Kelsey Poorman  5 Danbin Xu  6 Garrett M Frampton  7 Dean C Pavlick  7 Vincent A Miller  7 Bevan Tandon  8 Wojciech Swat  8 Lawrence Weiss  9 Vincent Anthony Funari  9 Jeffrey M Conroy  10 James L Prescott  11 Pranil K Chandra  11 Charles Ma  12 Kristen J Champion  12 Gregory X Baschkopf  12 Yuri A Fesko  12 Tracey Allen K Freitas  12 Scott A Tomlins  13 Daniel H Hovelson  13 Kevin White  14 Shelly Sorrells  14 Robert Tell  14 Nike Beaubier  14 David King  14 Lei Li  15 Kevin Kelly  15 Jasmina Uvalic  15 Bridgette Meyers  15 Ravindra Kolhe  16 Neal I Lindeman  17 Michele Baltay  17 Lynette M Sholl  18 Jean Lopategui  18 Eric Vail  18 Wenjuan Zhang  18 Milhan Telatar  19 Michelle Afkhami  19 Susan J Hsiao  20 Mahesh M Mansukhani  20 Emily Adams  21 LiQun Jiang  21 NCI-MATCH Designated LaboratoriesKenneth D Aldape  22 Mark Raffeld  22 Liqiang Xi  22 for NCI-COMPASS TeamHenning Stehr  23 Jeremy P Segal  24 Dara L Aisner  25 Kurtis D Davies  25 Noah A Brown  26 Robert J Livingston  27 Eric Q Konnick  28 Wei Song  28 James P Solomon  28 Zenta Walther  29 for NCI-MATCH Designated LaboratoriesLisa M McShane  1 Lyndsay N Harris  1 Alice P Chen  1 Gregory J Tsongalis  30 Stanley R Hamilton  31 Keith T Flaherty  32 Peter J O'Dwyer  33 Barbara A Conley  1 David R Patton  1 A John Iafrate  34 P Mickey Williams  2 James V Tricoli #  1 Chris Karlovich #  2
Affiliations

A Concordance Study among 26 NGS Laboratories Participating in the NCI Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice Clinical Trial

Linda K Zane et al. Clin Cancer Res. .

Abstract

Purpose: NCI selected a network of Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified laboratories performing routine next-generation sequencing (NGS) tumor testing to identify patients for the NCI Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial. This large network provided a unique opportunity to compare variant detection and reporting between a wide range of testing platforms.

Experimental design: Twenty-eight NGS assays from 26 laboratories within the NCI-MATCH Network, including the NCI-MATCH central laboratory (CL) and 11 commercial and 14 academic designated laboratories (DL), were used for this study. DNA from eight cell lines and two clinical samples were sequenced. Pairwise comparisons in variant detection and reporting between each DL and CL were performed for single-nucleotide variant, insertion and deletion, and copy-number variant classes.

Results: We observed high concordance in variant detection between CL and DL for single-nucleotide variants and insertions and deletions [average positive agreement (APA) > 95.4% for all pairwise comparisons] but lower concordance for variant reporting after analysis pipeline filtering. We observed much higher agreement between CL and assays using amplification as the target enrichment method (84.2% < APA ≤ 95.7%, average APA = 88.7%) than other assays using hybridization capture (69.7% < APA ≤ 93.8%, average APA = 77.4%) due to blacklisting of actionable variants in low complexity regions. For copy-number variant reporting, we observed high agreement (APA > 82%) except between CL and two assays (APA = 76.9% and 71.4%) due to differences in estimation of copy numbers. Notably, for all variants, differences in variant interpretation also contributed to reporting discrepancies.

Conclusions: This study indicates that different NGS tumor profiling tests currently in widespread clinical use achieve high concordance between assays in variant detection. For variant reporting, observed discrepancies are mainly introduced during the bioinformatic analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

A. John Iafrate reports receiving royalties from Invitae and being a scientific advisory board member for Kinnate, Repare, SequreDx and Paige.AI. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by the other authors.

The views presented in this article are those of the authors and should not be viewed as official opinions or positions of the National Cancer Institute, NIH, or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

References

    1. Conley BA and Doroshow JH, Molecular analysis for therapy choice: NCI MATCH. Semin Oncol, 2014. 41(3): p. 297–9. - PubMed
    1. O’Rawe J, et al. , Low concordance of multiple variant-calling pipelines: practical implications for exome and genome sequencing. Genome Med, 2013. 5(3): p. 28. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cornish A and Guda C, A Comparison of Variant Calling Pipelines Using Genome in a Bottle as a Reference. Biomed Res Int, 2015. 2015: p. 456479. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Merker JD, et al. , Proficiency Testing of Standardized Samples Shows Very High Interlaboratory Agreement for Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Oncology Assays. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2019. 143(4): p. 463–471. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Keegan A, et al. , Proficiency Testing of Standardized Samples Shows High Interlaboratory Agreement for Clinical Next Generation Sequencing-Based Hematologic Malignancy Assays With Survey Material-Specific Differences in Variant Frequencies. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2020. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources