Enhancing Clinical Applications by Evaluation of Sensitivity and Specificity in Whole Exome Sequencing

The cost-effectiveness of whole exome sequencing (WES) remains controversial due to variant call variability, necessitating sensitivity and specificity evaluation. WES was performed by three companies (AA, BB, and CC) using reference standards composed of DNA from hydatidiform mole and individual blood at various ratios. Sensitivity was assessed by the detection rate of null-homozygote (N-H) alleles at expected variant allelic fractions, while false positive (FP) errors were counted for unexpected alleles. Sensitivity was approximately 20% for in-house results from BB and CC and around 5% for AA. Dynamic Read Analysis for GENomics (DRAGEN) analyses identified 1.34 to 1.71 times more variants, detecting over 96% of in-house variants, with sensitivity for common variants increasing to 5%. In-house FP errors varied significantly among companies (up to 13.97 times), while DRAGEN minimized this variation. Despite DRAGEN showing higher FP errors for BB and CC, the increased sensitivity highlights the importance of effective bioinformatic conditions. We also assessed the potential effects of target enrichment and proposed optimal cutoff values for the read depth and variant allele fraction in WES. Optimizing bioinformatic analysis based on sensitivity and specificity from reference standards can enhance variant detection and improve the clinical utility of WES.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
Published
2024-12-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms252413250
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Genomics and Rare Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Enhancing Clinical Applications by Evaluation of Sensitivity and Specificity in Whole Exome Sequencing

Seong Gu Heo, Yongdoo Choi, Youngbeen Moon, Tae-Min Kim et al.
2 citations
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
Genomics and Rare Diseases
1.10
article

Enhancing Clinical Applications by Evaluation of Sensitivity and Specificity in Whole Exome Sequencing

Seong Gu Heo, Yongdoo Choi, Youngbeen Moon, Tae-Min Kim, Chung Hwan Hong, Jong-Kwang Kim, Hyewon Choi, Namshik Han, Dong-eun Lee, Young-Ho Kim, Hyeri Cho, Hana Choi, Kyeong-Man Hong, Eun-Kyung Kang, Seo-Hyeon Ye
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The cost-effectiveness of whole exome sequencing (WES) remains controversial due to variant call variability, necessitating sensitivity and specificity evaluation. WES was performed by three companies (AA, BB, and CC) using reference standards composed of DNA from hydatidiform mole and individual blood at various ratios. Sensitivity was assessed by the detection rate of null-homozygote (N-H) alleles at expected variant allelic fractions, while false positive (FP) errors were counted for unexpected alleles. Sensitivity was approximately 20% for in-house results from BB and CC and around 5% for AA. Dynamic Read Analysis for GENomics (DRAGEN) analyses identified 1.34 to 1.71 times more variants, detecting over 96% of in-house variants, with sensitivity for common variants increasing to 5%. In-house FP errors varied significantly among companies (up to 13.97 times), while DRAGEN minimized this variation. Despite DRAGEN showing higher FP errors for BB and CC, the increased sensitivity highlights the importance of effective bioinformatic conditions. We also assessed the potential effects of target enrichment and proposed optimal cutoff values for the read depth and variant allele fraction in WES. Optimizing bioinformatic analysis based on sensitivity and specificity from reference standards can enhance variant detection and improve the clinical utility of WES.

International Journal of Molecular SciencesVol. 25(24)
Broad Institute (US), Harvard University (US), Wellcome/MRC Cambridge Stem Cell Institute (GB), University of Cambridge (GB), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), National Cancer Center (KR), Catholic University of Korea (KR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Genomics and Rare Diseases
1.10
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.