Cargando…
Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy
Ultra-low coverage sequencing (ULCS) is one of the most promising strategies for sequencing based clinical application. These clinical applications, especially prenatal diagnosis, have a strict requirement of turn-around-time; therefore, the application of ULCS is restricted by current high throughp...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961333/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24651575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092192 |
_version_ | 1782308280334286848 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Shengpei Li, Sheng Xie, Weiwei Li, Xuchao Zhang, Chunlei Jiang, Haojun Zheng, Jing Pan, Xiaoyu Zheng, Hancheng Liu, Jia Sophie Deng, Yongqiang Chen, Fang Jiang, Hui |
author_facet | Chen, Shengpei Li, Sheng Xie, Weiwei Li, Xuchao Zhang, Chunlei Jiang, Haojun Zheng, Jing Pan, Xiaoyu Zheng, Hancheng Liu, Jia Sophie Deng, Yongqiang Chen, Fang Jiang, Hui |
author_sort | Chen, Shengpei |
collection | PubMed |
description | Ultra-low coverage sequencing (ULCS) is one of the most promising strategies for sequencing based clinical application. These clinical applications, especially prenatal diagnosis, have a strict requirement of turn-around-time; therefore, the application of ULCS is restricted by current high throughput sequencing platforms. Recently, the emergence of rapid sequencing platforms, such as MiSeq and Ion Proton, brings ULCS strategy into a new era. The comparison of their performance could shed lights on their potential application in large-scale clinic trials. In this study, we performed ULCS (<0.1X coverage) on both MiSeq and Ion Proton platforms for 18 spontaneous abortion fetuses carrying aneuploidy and compared their performance on different levels. Overall basic data and GC bias showed no significant difference between these two platforms. We also found the sex and aneuploidy detection indicated 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity on both platforms. Our study generated essential data from these two rapid sequencing platforms, which provides useful reference for later research and potentially accelerates the clinical applications of ULCS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3961333 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39613332014-03-24 Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy Chen, Shengpei Li, Sheng Xie, Weiwei Li, Xuchao Zhang, Chunlei Jiang, Haojun Zheng, Jing Pan, Xiaoyu Zheng, Hancheng Liu, Jia Sophie Deng, Yongqiang Chen, Fang Jiang, Hui PLoS One Research Article Ultra-low coverage sequencing (ULCS) is one of the most promising strategies for sequencing based clinical application. These clinical applications, especially prenatal diagnosis, have a strict requirement of turn-around-time; therefore, the application of ULCS is restricted by current high throughput sequencing platforms. Recently, the emergence of rapid sequencing platforms, such as MiSeq and Ion Proton, brings ULCS strategy into a new era. The comparison of their performance could shed lights on their potential application in large-scale clinic trials. In this study, we performed ULCS (<0.1X coverage) on both MiSeq and Ion Proton platforms for 18 spontaneous abortion fetuses carrying aneuploidy and compared their performance on different levels. Overall basic data and GC bias showed no significant difference between these two platforms. We also found the sex and aneuploidy detection indicated 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity on both platforms. Our study generated essential data from these two rapid sequencing platforms, which provides useful reference for later research and potentially accelerates the clinical applications of ULCS. Public Library of Science 2014-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3961333/ /pubmed/24651575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092192 Text en © 2014 Chen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chen, Shengpei Li, Sheng Xie, Weiwei Li, Xuchao Zhang, Chunlei Jiang, Haojun Zheng, Jing Pan, Xiaoyu Zheng, Hancheng Liu, Jia Sophie Deng, Yongqiang Chen, Fang Jiang, Hui Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title | Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title_full | Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title_fullStr | Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title_full_unstemmed | Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title_short | Performance Comparison between Rapid Sequencing Platforms for Ultra-Low Coverage Sequencing Strategy |
title_sort | performance comparison between rapid sequencing platforms for ultra-low coverage sequencing strategy |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961333/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24651575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092192 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenshengpei performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT lisheng performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT xieweiwei performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT lixuchao performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT zhangchunlei performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT jianghaojun performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT zhengjing performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT panxiaoyu performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT zhenghancheng performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT liujiasophie performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT dengyongqiang performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT chenfang performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy AT jianghui performancecomparisonbetweenrapidsequencingplatformsforultralowcoveragesequencingstrategy |