- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Faculty Research and Publications /
- Comparison of genome-wide array genomic hybridization...
Open Collections
UBC Faculty Research and Publications
Comparison of genome-wide array genomic hybridization platforms for the detection of copy number variants in idiopathic mental retardation Tucker, Tracy; Montpetit, Alexandre; Chai, David; Chan, Susanna; Chénier, Sébastien; Coe, Bradley P.; Delaney, Allen; Eydoux, Patrice; Lam, Wan; Langlois, Sylvie; Lemyre, Emmanuelle; Marra, Marco, 1966-; Qian, Hong; Rouleau, Guy A.; Vincent, David; Michaud, Jacques L.; Friedman, J. M. (Jan Marshall), 1947-
Abstract
Background:
Clinical laboratories are adopting array genomic hybridization as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome array genomic hybridization platforms are available, but little is known about their comparative performance in a clinical context.
Methods:
We studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500 K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244 K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385 K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We also determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32 K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP arrays.
Results:
The Affymetrix 500 K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosomal CNVs in the 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs appeared to be de novo, but only 34 (22%) were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 most likely pathogenic and 2 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 9 of these putatively pathogenic CNVs were detected by the Affymetrix 500 K, Agilent, NimbleGen and the Illumina arrays, and 5 were found by the SMRT BAC array. Both putatively pathogenic CNVs identified in the 15 trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 were identified by this platform.
Conclusions:
Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls on each of the platforms supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different technology.
Item Metadata
| Title |
Comparison of genome-wide array genomic hybridization platforms for the detection of copy number variants in idiopathic mental retardation
|
| Creator |
Tucker, Tracy; Montpetit, Alexandre; Chai, David; Chan, Susanna; Chénier, Sébastien; Coe, Bradley P.; Delaney, Allen; Eydoux, Patrice; Lam, Wan; Langlois, Sylvie; Lemyre, Emmanuelle; Marra, Marco, 1966-; Qian, Hong; Rouleau, Guy A.; Vincent, David; Michaud, Jacques L.; Friedman, J. M. (Jan Marshall), 1947-
|
| Contributor | |
| Publisher |
BioMed Central
|
| Date Issued |
2011-03-25
|
| Description |
Background:
Clinical laboratories are adopting array genomic hybridization as a standard clinical test. A number of whole genome array genomic hybridization platforms are available, but little is known about their comparative performance in a clinical context.
Methods:
We studied 30 children with idiopathic MR and both unaffected parents of each child using Affymetrix 500 K GeneChip SNP arrays, Agilent Human Genome 244 K oligonucleotide arrays and NimbleGen 385 K Whole-Genome oligonucleotide arrays. We also determined whether CNVs called on these platforms were detected by Illumina Hap550 beadchips or SMRT 32 K BAC whole genome tiling arrays and tested 15 of the 30 trios on Affymetrix 6.0 SNP arrays.
Results:
The Affymetrix 500 K, Agilent and NimbleGen platforms identified 3061 autosomal and 117 X chromosomal CNVs in the 30 trios. 147 of these CNVs appeared to be de novo, but only 34 (22%) were found on more than one platform. Performing genotype-phenotype correlations, we identified 7 most likely pathogenic and 2 possibly pathogenic CNVs for MR. All 9 of these putatively pathogenic CNVs were detected by the Affymetrix 500 K, Agilent, NimbleGen and the Illumina arrays, and 5 were found by the SMRT BAC array. Both putatively pathogenic CNVs identified in the 15 trios tested with the Affymetrix 6.0 were identified by this platform.
Conclusions:
Our findings demonstrate that different results are obtained with different platforms and illustrate the trade-off that exists between sensitivity and specificity. The large number of apparently false positive CNV calls on each of the platforms supports the need for validating clinically important findings with a different technology.
|
| Genre | |
| Type | |
| Language |
eng
|
| Date Available |
2016-01-22
|
| Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
| Rights |
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
|
| DOI |
10.14288/1.0223648
|
| URI | |
| Affiliation | |
| Citation |
BMC Medical Genomics. 2011 Mar 25;4(1):25
|
| Publisher DOI |
10.1186/1755-8794-4-25
|
| Peer Review Status |
Reviewed
|
| Scholarly Level |
Faculty
|
| Copyright Holder |
Tucker et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
|
| Rights URI | |
| Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)