Back

Next-Generation Sequencing Methods for Sensitive Characterisation of Hepatitis B Viral Genomes: A European Multicentre Study

Fu, M. X.; Perdomo, M. F.; Lumley, S. F.; Ringlander, J.; Kean, K.; Reid, K.; Mayne, R.; Torres Monteguth, O. E.; Forrest, L.; Buddle, S.; Botha, J. C.; Stenback, J. B.; Dickson, Z.; Kent, C.; Chai, H.; Byott, M.; Hannolainen, L.; Secret, S.; Airey, G.; Hedman, K.; Andersson, M. I.; Ansari, M. A.; Nastouli, E.; Breuer, J.; Matthews, P. C.; Golubchik, T.; Irving, W. L.; Simmonds, P.; Harvala, H.

2025-06-20 infectious diseases Community evaluation
10.1101/2025.06.17.25329745 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesThis multicentre study investigated the utility of next-generation sequencing (NGS) to detect and generate hepatitis B virus (HBV) genomes in samples of low viral load (from 0.2 to 6207 IU/ml). Methods23 HBV DNA positive plasma samples of genotypes A-E and one HBV-negative control sample were assayed blindly via 9 established NGS methods from 6 European laboratories. Methods included untargeted metagenomics, pre-enrichment by probe-capture followed by Illumina sequencing, and HBV-specific PCR pre-amplification followed by sequencing with Nanopore or Illumina. ResultsFull HBV genomes were obtained only from samples with viral loads >1000 IU/ml using probe-capture methods, >200 IU/ml using PCR-Illumina methods, >10 IU/ml using PCR-Nanopore methods, and in no samples using metagenomic methods. Contamination was observed in the negative control and samples with very low viral loads in all PCR-based methods. Probe-capture and metagenomic methods detected additional viruses not routinely screened in blood donations, including polyomaviruses and herpesviruses; positive results were confirmed by PCR. ConclusionsNGS may delineate whole-genome sequences at low viral loads if supported by a PCR pre-amplification step. Probe-capture methods also reliably detect HBV without pre-amplification but achieve limited genome characterisation at low viral loads; they may additionally detect a wide range of blood-borne viruses.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
51.5%
50% of probability mass above
2
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.3%
4
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
5
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
6
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
7
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
8
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
10
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
11
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
12
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
13
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
15
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
16
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
17
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
19
Journal of General Virology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
20
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 75%
0.7%
21
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
22
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.7%
23
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.6%