But a sampling of a dozen tests from each of three commercial
laboratories has found they often fail to adequately analyze large
segments of DNA that could be contributing to disease, researchers
report this week in the journal Clinical Chemistry.
Sequencing exomes can help solve complex cases, and the tests have
become a fairly common tool when doctors suspect a genetic mutation
could be causing rare or undiagnosed disease, especially in
children, Dr. Garrett Gotway said in a telephone interview.
Exome sequencing tests look only at the segments of DNA known as
exons that contain instructions for making proteins. While exons
represent just 2 percent of the whole genome, they contain some 85
percent of gene variations associated with disease.
According to the researchers, about half of these tests come up
negative.
For the current study, Gotway, a clinical geneticist at UT
Southwestern in Dallas, Texas, and colleagues reanalyzed tests
performed between 2012 and 2016 at three commercial labs. They found
that on average, based on accepted industry standards, each lab
adequately analyzed only three-quarters of the genes tested.
Less than 1.5% of the genes were completely analyzed in all 36
samples, and there was wide variation among the labs. An analysis of
the 12 tests from one lab, for example, showed that 28% of the genes
were never adequately analyzed.
"Many of the physicians who order these tests don't know this is
happening," coauthor Dr. Jason Park, an associate professor of
pathology at UT Southwestern, said in a statement.
Park said parents of young children with serious disease want their
children to have the most complete diagnostic test possible. "But
they don't realize whole exome sequencing may miss something that a
more targeted genetic test would find," he said.
[to top of second column] |
Without being able to trust the result, a negative test would be
meaningless, said Park, who has done consulting work for Japan-based
Miraca Holdings Inc, a diagnostic company that owns Baylor Genetics,
a sequencing lab.
Heidi Rehm, medical director of the Clinical Research Sequencing lab
at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, who was not involved with the study, said assessing
the quality of exome tests on the market is important to ensure that
patients are getting high-quality tests.
But she said exome techniques have "evolved substantially" since the
years when the 12 samples from each lab were taken.
"It would be great to see data from more recent test platforms as
well as understand whether the exome platform differences impacted
clinical diagnoses," she said in an email.
Gotway acknowledged the sample was small. "It is possible we caught
some labs in a period where they had some bugs that needed to be
fixed," he said.
He said he hoped the study might encourage more study by oversight
bodies.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/35zoeqy Clinical Chemistry, online December
30, 2019.
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|