Back

Benchmarking and quality control for nanopore sequencing and feasibility of rapid genomics in New Zealand: validation phase at a single quaternary hospital

Nyaga, D. M.; Tsai, P.; Gebbie, C.; Phua, H. H.; Yap, P.; Stabej, P. L. Q.; Farrow, S.; Rong, J.; Toldi, G.; Thorstensen, E.; Stark, Z.; Lunke, S.; Gamet, K.; Dyk, J. V.; Greenslade, M.; O'Sullivan, J. M.

2024-06-15 genetic and genomic medicine
10.1101/2024.06.13.24307636 medRxiv
Show abstract

Approximately 200 critically ill infants and children in New Zealand are in high-dependency neonatal/paediatric acute care at any given time, many with suspected genetic conditions, necessitating a scalable distributed solution for rapid genomic testing. We adopt the existing acute care genomics protocol of an accredited laboratory and established an expandable acute care clinical pipeline based around the Oxford Nanopore Technologies PromethION 2 solo system connected to a Bayesian AI-based clinical decision support tool (Fabric GEM software). In the establishment phase, we performed benchmarking using Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) benchmarking tools and Genome in a Bottle samples HG002-HG007. We evaluated single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small insertions-deletions (indels) calls and achieved SNV precision and recall of 0.997 {+/-} 0.0006 and 0.992 {+/-} 0.001, respectively. Small indel identification approached a precision of 0.922 {+/-} 0.019 and recall of 0.838 {+/-} 0.043. Rarefaction analyses demonstrated that SNV identification plateaus at [~]20X coverage, while small indels plateaus at [~]40X coverage. Large genomic variations from Coriell Copy Number Variation Reference Panel 1 (CNVPANEL01) were reliably detected with [~]2M long reads. Finally, we present results obtained from ten trio samples that were processed through the pipeline validation phase, averaging a 5-day turnaround time, conducted in parallel with a clinically accredited short-read rapid genomic testing pipeline.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Genetics in Medicine
78 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.1%
2
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
3
The American Journal of Human Genetics
234 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
12.8%
4
Genetics in Medicine Open
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.8%
5
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
npj Genomic Medicine
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.6%
7
Human Genetics and Genomics Advances
84 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.5%
8
Cell Genomics
172 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
9
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.3%
10
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.3%
11
Nature Genetics
286 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
12
European Journal of Human Genetics
58 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
13
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 64%
1.1%
14
Human Genomics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
15
Human Genetics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
16
BMC Medical Genomics
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
Med
39 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
18
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
19
Journal of Medical Genetics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
20
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.9%
21
Genome Research
468 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
22
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
23
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
24
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%