单细胞测序中SureSelect和Nextera外显子组捕获性能的比较。

IF 1.1 4区 生物学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Human Heredity Pub Date : 2018-01-01 Epub Date: 2019-01-22 DOI:10.1159/000490506
Wendy J Huss, Qiang Hu, Sean T Glenn, Kalyan J Gangavarapu, Jianmin Wang, Jesse D Luce, Paul K Quinn, Elizabeth A Brese, Fenglin Zhan, Jeffrey M Conroy, Gyorgy Paragh, Barbara A Foster, Carl D Morrison, Song Liu, Lei Wei
{"title":"单细胞测序中SureSelect和Nextera外显子组捕获性能的比较。","authors":"Wendy J Huss,&nbsp;Qiang Hu,&nbsp;Sean T Glenn,&nbsp;Kalyan J Gangavarapu,&nbsp;Jianmin Wang,&nbsp;Jesse D Luce,&nbsp;Paul K Quinn,&nbsp;Elizabeth A Brese,&nbsp;Fenglin Zhan,&nbsp;Jeffrey M Conroy,&nbsp;Gyorgy Paragh,&nbsp;Barbara A Foster,&nbsp;Carl D Morrison,&nbsp;Song Liu,&nbsp;Lei Wei","doi":"10.1159/000490506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advances in single-cell sequencing provide unprecedented opportunities for clinical examination of circulating tumor cells, cancer stem cells, and other rare cells responsible for disease progression and drug resistance. On the genomic level, single-cell whole exome sequencing (scWES) started to gain popularity with its unique potentials in characterizing mutational landscapes at a single-cell level. Currently, there is little known about the performance of different exome capture kits in scWES. Nextera rapid capture (NXT; Illumina, Inc.) has been the only exome capture kit recommended for scWES by Fluidigm C1, a widely accessed system in single-cell preparation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, we compared the performance of NXT following Fluidigm's protocol with Agilent SureSelectXT Target Enrichment System (AGL), another exome capture kit widely used for bulk sequencing. We created DNA libraries of 192 single cells isolated from spheres grown from a melanoma specimen using Fluidigm C1. Twelve high-yield cells were selected to perform dual-exome capture and sequencing using AGL and NXT in parallel. After mapping and coverage analysis, AGL outperformed NXT in coverage uniformity, mapping rates of reads, exome capture rates, and low PCR duplicate rates. For germline variant calling, AGL achieved better performance in overlap with known variants in dbSNP and transition-transversion ratios. Using calls from high coverage bulk sequencing from blood DNA as the golden standard, AGL-based scWES demonstrated high positive predictive values, and medium to high sensitivity. Lastly, we evaluated somatic mutation calling by comparing single-cell data with the matched blood sequence as control. On average, 300 mutations were identified in each cell. In 10 of 12 cells, higher numbers of mutations were identified using AGL than NXT, probably caused by coverage depth. When mutations are adequately covered in both AGL and NXT data, the two methods showed very high concordance (93-100% per cell).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results suggest that AGL can also be used for scWES when there is sufficient DNA, and it yields better data quality than the current Fluidigm's protocol using NXT.</p>","PeriodicalId":13226,"journal":{"name":"Human Heredity","volume":"83 3","pages":"153-162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000490506","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.\",\"authors\":\"Wendy J Huss,&nbsp;Qiang Hu,&nbsp;Sean T Glenn,&nbsp;Kalyan J Gangavarapu,&nbsp;Jianmin Wang,&nbsp;Jesse D Luce,&nbsp;Paul K Quinn,&nbsp;Elizabeth A Brese,&nbsp;Fenglin Zhan,&nbsp;Jeffrey M Conroy,&nbsp;Gyorgy Paragh,&nbsp;Barbara A Foster,&nbsp;Carl D Morrison,&nbsp;Song Liu,&nbsp;Lei Wei\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000490506\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advances in single-cell sequencing provide unprecedented opportunities for clinical examination of circulating tumor cells, cancer stem cells, and other rare cells responsible for disease progression and drug resistance. On the genomic level, single-cell whole exome sequencing (scWES) started to gain popularity with its unique potentials in characterizing mutational landscapes at a single-cell level. Currently, there is little known about the performance of different exome capture kits in scWES. Nextera rapid capture (NXT; Illumina, Inc.) has been the only exome capture kit recommended for scWES by Fluidigm C1, a widely accessed system in single-cell preparation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, we compared the performance of NXT following Fluidigm's protocol with Agilent SureSelectXT Target Enrichment System (AGL), another exome capture kit widely used for bulk sequencing. We created DNA libraries of 192 single cells isolated from spheres grown from a melanoma specimen using Fluidigm C1. Twelve high-yield cells were selected to perform dual-exome capture and sequencing using AGL and NXT in parallel. After mapping and coverage analysis, AGL outperformed NXT in coverage uniformity, mapping rates of reads, exome capture rates, and low PCR duplicate rates. For germline variant calling, AGL achieved better performance in overlap with known variants in dbSNP and transition-transversion ratios. Using calls from high coverage bulk sequencing from blood DNA as the golden standard, AGL-based scWES demonstrated high positive predictive values, and medium to high sensitivity. Lastly, we evaluated somatic mutation calling by comparing single-cell data with the matched blood sequence as control. On average, 300 mutations were identified in each cell. In 10 of 12 cells, higher numbers of mutations were identified using AGL than NXT, probably caused by coverage depth. When mutations are adequately covered in both AGL and NXT data, the two methods showed very high concordance (93-100% per cell).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results suggest that AGL can also be used for scWES when there is sufficient DNA, and it yields better data quality than the current Fluidigm's protocol using NXT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Heredity\",\"volume\":\"83 3\",\"pages\":\"153-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000490506\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Heredity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000490506\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Heredity","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000490506","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:单细胞测序技术的进步为循环肿瘤细胞、癌症干细胞和其他与疾病进展和耐药性有关的罕见细胞的临床检查提供了前所未有的机会。在基因组水平上,单细胞全外显子组测序(scWES)因其在单细胞水平上表征突变景观的独特潜力而开始受到欢迎。目前,对不同外显子组捕获试剂盒在scWES中的性能知之甚少。Nextera快速捕获(NXT;Fluidigm C1是一个广泛使用的单细胞制备系统,Illumina, Inc.)是唯一推荐用于scWES的外显子组捕获试剂盒。结果:在本研究中,我们比较了NXT在Fluidigm方案下与Agilent SureSelectXT目标富集系统(AGL)的性能,AGL是另一种广泛用于批量测序的外显子组捕获试剂盒。我们用Fluidigm C1建立了192个单细胞的DNA文库,这些细胞是从黑色素瘤标本生长的球体中分离出来的。选择12个高产细胞,使用AGL和NXT并行进行双外显子组捕获和测序。经过定位和覆盖分析,AGL在覆盖均匀性、reads定位率、外显子组捕获率和低PCR重复率方面优于NXT。对于种系变异调用,AGL在dbSNP和过渡-翻转比率上与已知变异的重叠表现更好。使用来自血液DNA高覆盖率批量测序的呼叫作为金标准,基于agl的scWES显示出高阳性预测值和中至高灵敏度。最后,我们通过比较单细胞数据和匹配的血液序列作为对照来评估体细胞突变召唤。在每个细胞中平均鉴定出300个突变。在12个细胞中的10个中,AGL比NXT鉴定出更多的突变,可能是覆盖深度造成的。当AGL和NXT数据充分覆盖突变时,两种方法显示出非常高的一致性(每个细胞93-100%)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,当有足够的DNA时,AGL也可以用于scWES,并且它比目前Fluidigm使用NXT的方案产生更好的数据质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.

Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.

Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.

Comparison of SureSelect and Nextera Exome Capture Performance in Single-Cell Sequencing.

Background: Advances in single-cell sequencing provide unprecedented opportunities for clinical examination of circulating tumor cells, cancer stem cells, and other rare cells responsible for disease progression and drug resistance. On the genomic level, single-cell whole exome sequencing (scWES) started to gain popularity with its unique potentials in characterizing mutational landscapes at a single-cell level. Currently, there is little known about the performance of different exome capture kits in scWES. Nextera rapid capture (NXT; Illumina, Inc.) has been the only exome capture kit recommended for scWES by Fluidigm C1, a widely accessed system in single-cell preparation.

Results: In this study, we compared the performance of NXT following Fluidigm's protocol with Agilent SureSelectXT Target Enrichment System (AGL), another exome capture kit widely used for bulk sequencing. We created DNA libraries of 192 single cells isolated from spheres grown from a melanoma specimen using Fluidigm C1. Twelve high-yield cells were selected to perform dual-exome capture and sequencing using AGL and NXT in parallel. After mapping and coverage analysis, AGL outperformed NXT in coverage uniformity, mapping rates of reads, exome capture rates, and low PCR duplicate rates. For germline variant calling, AGL achieved better performance in overlap with known variants in dbSNP and transition-transversion ratios. Using calls from high coverage bulk sequencing from blood DNA as the golden standard, AGL-based scWES demonstrated high positive predictive values, and medium to high sensitivity. Lastly, we evaluated somatic mutation calling by comparing single-cell data with the matched blood sequence as control. On average, 300 mutations were identified in each cell. In 10 of 12 cells, higher numbers of mutations were identified using AGL than NXT, probably caused by coverage depth. When mutations are adequately covered in both AGL and NXT data, the two methods showed very high concordance (93-100% per cell).

Conclusions: Our results suggest that AGL can also be used for scWES when there is sufficient DNA, and it yields better data quality than the current Fluidigm's protocol using NXT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Heredity
Human Heredity 生物-遗传学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gathering original research reports and short communications from all over the world, ''Human Heredity'' is devoted to methodological and applied research on the genetics of human populations, association and linkage analysis, genetic mechanisms of disease, and new methods for statistical genetics, for example, analysis of rare variants and results from next generation sequencing. The value of this information to many branches of medicine is shown by the number of citations the journal receives in fields ranging from immunology and hematology to epidemiology and public health planning, and the fact that at least 50% of all ''Human Heredity'' papers are still cited more than 8 years after publication (according to ISI Journal Citation Reports). Special issues on methodological topics (such as ‘Consanguinity and Genomics’ in 2014; ‘Analyzing Rare Variants in Complex Diseases’ in 2012) or reviews of advances in particular fields (‘Genetic Diversity in European Populations: Evolutionary Evidence and Medical Implications’ in 2014; ‘Genes and the Environment in Obesity’ in 2013) are published every year. Renowned experts in the field are invited to contribute to these special issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信