Cargando…
New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms
Whole exome sequencing (WES) is increasingly used in research and diagnostics. WES users expect coverage of the entire coding region of known genes as well as sufficient read depth for the covered regions. It is, however, unknown which recent WES platform is most suitable to meet these expectations....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4477645/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25820422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv216 |
_version_ | 1782377786974928896 |
---|---|
author | Meienberg, Janine Zerjavic, Katja Keller, Irene Okoniewski, Michal Patrignani, Andrea Ludin, Katja Xu, Zhenyu Steinmann, Beat Carrel, Thierry Röthlisberger, Benno Schlapbach, Ralph Bruggmann, Rémy Matyas, Gabor |
author_facet | Meienberg, Janine Zerjavic, Katja Keller, Irene Okoniewski, Michal Patrignani, Andrea Ludin, Katja Xu, Zhenyu Steinmann, Beat Carrel, Thierry Röthlisberger, Benno Schlapbach, Ralph Bruggmann, Rémy Matyas, Gabor |
author_sort | Meienberg, Janine |
collection | PubMed |
description | Whole exome sequencing (WES) is increasingly used in research and diagnostics. WES users expect coverage of the entire coding region of known genes as well as sufficient read depth for the covered regions. It is, however, unknown which recent WES platform is most suitable to meet these expectations. We present insights into the performance of the most recent standard exome enrichment platforms from Agilent, NimbleGen and Illumina applied to six different DNA samples by two sequencing vendors per platform. Our results suggest that both Agilent and NimbleGen overall perform better than Illumina and that the high enrichment performance of Agilent is stable among samples and between vendors, whereas NimbleGen is only able to achieve vendor- and sample-specific best exome coverage. Moreover, the recent Agilent platform overall captures more coding exons with sufficient read depth than NimbleGen and Illumina. Due to considerable gaps in effective exome coverage, however, the three platforms cannot capture all known coding exons alone or in combination, requiring improvement. Our data emphasize the importance of evaluation of updated platform versions and suggest that enrichment-free whole genome sequencing can overcome the limitations of WES in sufficiently covering coding exons, especially GC-rich regions, and in characterizing structural variants. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4477645 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44776452015-06-29 New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms Meienberg, Janine Zerjavic, Katja Keller, Irene Okoniewski, Michal Patrignani, Andrea Ludin, Katja Xu, Zhenyu Steinmann, Beat Carrel, Thierry Röthlisberger, Benno Schlapbach, Ralph Bruggmann, Rémy Matyas, Gabor Nucleic Acids Res Methods Online Whole exome sequencing (WES) is increasingly used in research and diagnostics. WES users expect coverage of the entire coding region of known genes as well as sufficient read depth for the covered regions. It is, however, unknown which recent WES platform is most suitable to meet these expectations. We present insights into the performance of the most recent standard exome enrichment platforms from Agilent, NimbleGen and Illumina applied to six different DNA samples by two sequencing vendors per platform. Our results suggest that both Agilent and NimbleGen overall perform better than Illumina and that the high enrichment performance of Agilent is stable among samples and between vendors, whereas NimbleGen is only able to achieve vendor- and sample-specific best exome coverage. Moreover, the recent Agilent platform overall captures more coding exons with sufficient read depth than NimbleGen and Illumina. Due to considerable gaps in effective exome coverage, however, the three platforms cannot capture all known coding exons alone or in combination, requiring improvement. Our data emphasize the importance of evaluation of updated platform versions and suggest that enrichment-free whole genome sequencing can overcome the limitations of WES in sufficiently covering coding exons, especially GC-rich regions, and in characterizing structural variants. Oxford University Press 2015-06-23 2015-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4477645/ /pubmed/25820422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv216 Text en © The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Nucleic Acids Research. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Methods Online Meienberg, Janine Zerjavic, Katja Keller, Irene Okoniewski, Michal Patrignani, Andrea Ludin, Katja Xu, Zhenyu Steinmann, Beat Carrel, Thierry Röthlisberger, Benno Schlapbach, Ralph Bruggmann, Rémy Matyas, Gabor New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title | New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title_full | New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title_fullStr | New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title_full_unstemmed | New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title_short | New insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
title_sort | new insights into the performance of human whole-exome capture platforms |
topic | Methods Online |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4477645/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25820422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv216 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meienbergjanine newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT zerjavickatja newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT kellerirene newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT okoniewskimichal newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT patrignaniandrea newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT ludinkatja newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT xuzhenyu newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT steinmannbeat newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT carrelthierry newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT rothlisbergerbenno newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT schlapbachralph newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT bruggmannremy newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms AT matyasgabor newinsightsintotheperformanceofhumanwholeexomecaptureplatforms |