Rostislav Skitchenko, Sergey Smirnov, Mikhail Krapivin, Anna Smirnova, Mykyta Artomov, Alexander Loboda, Yulia Dinikina
{"title":"Case report: A case study of variant calling pipeline selection effect on the molecular diagnostics outcome.","authors":"Rostislav Skitchenko, Sergey Smirnov, Mikhail Krapivin, Anna Smirnova, Mykyta Artomov, Alexander Loboda, Yulia Dinikina","doi":"10.3389/fonc.2024.1422811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Next-generation sequencing technologies have not only defined a breakthrough in medical genetics, but also been able to enter routine clinical practice to determine individual genetic susceptibilities. Modern technological developments are routinely introduced to genetic analysis overtaking the established approaches, potentially raising a number of challenges. To what extent is the advantage of new methodologies in synthetic metrics, such as precision and recall, more important than stability and reproducibility? Could differences in the technical protocol for calling variants be crucial to the diagnosis and, by extension, the patient's treatment strategy? A regulatory review process may delay the incorporation of potentially beneficial technologies, resulting in missed opportunities to make the right medical decisions. On the other hand, a blind adoption of new technologies based solely on synthetic metrics of precision and recall can lead to incorrect conclusions and adverse outcomes for the specific patient. Here, we use the example of a patient with a WHO-diagnosed desmoplastic/nodular SHH-medulloblastoma to explore how the choice of DNA variant search protocol affects the genetic diagnostics outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":12482,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Oncology","volume":"14 ","pages":"1422811"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11560904/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1422811","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Next-generation sequencing technologies have not only defined a breakthrough in medical genetics, but also been able to enter routine clinical practice to determine individual genetic susceptibilities. Modern technological developments are routinely introduced to genetic analysis overtaking the established approaches, potentially raising a number of challenges. To what extent is the advantage of new methodologies in synthetic metrics, such as precision and recall, more important than stability and reproducibility? Could differences in the technical protocol for calling variants be crucial to the diagnosis and, by extension, the patient's treatment strategy? A regulatory review process may delay the incorporation of potentially beneficial technologies, resulting in missed opportunities to make the right medical decisions. On the other hand, a blind adoption of new technologies based solely on synthetic metrics of precision and recall can lead to incorrect conclusions and adverse outcomes for the specific patient. Here, we use the example of a patient with a WHO-diagnosed desmoplastic/nodular SHH-medulloblastoma to explore how the choice of DNA variant search protocol affects the genetic diagnostics outcome.
下一代测序技术不仅在医学遗传学领域取得了突破性进展,而且还能够进入常规临床实践,以确定个体的遗传易感性。现代技术的发展已成为遗传分析的常规,超越了既有的方法,这可能会带来一系列挑战。新方法在精确度和召回率等合成指标方面的优势在多大程度上比稳定性和可重复性更重要?调用变异体的技术方案差异是否会对诊断,进而对患者的治疗策略起到关键作用?监管审查程序可能会延误潜在有益技术的应用,导致错失做出正确医疗决策的机会。另一方面,仅根据精确度和召回率的合成指标盲目采用新技术可能会导致错误的结论,并对特定患者造成不良后果。在此,我们以一名被世界卫生组织诊断为脱鳞/结节性 SHH-母细胞瘤的患者为例,探讨 DNA 变异搜索方案的选择如何影响基因诊断结果。
期刊介绍:
Cancer Imaging and Diagnosis is dedicated to the publication of results from clinical and research studies applied to cancer diagnosis and treatment. The section aims to publish studies from the entire field of cancer imaging: results from routine use of clinical imaging in both radiology and nuclear medicine, results from clinical trials, experimental molecular imaging in humans and small animals, research on new contrast agents in CT, MRI, ultrasound, publication of new technical applications and processing algorithms to improve the standardization of quantitative imaging and image guided interventions for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.