Jeffrey A. SoRelle , Birgit H. Funke , Celeste C. Eno , Jianling Ji , Avni Santani , Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir , Megan Wachsmann , Karen E. Wain , Rong Mao
{"title":"切片检验--从订购到报告的注意事项:分子病理学协会、美国病理学家学会和全国遗传咨询师协会联合报告","authors":"Jeffrey A. SoRelle , Birgit H. Funke , Celeste C. Eno , Jianling Ji , Avni Santani , Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir , Megan Wachsmann , Karen E. Wain , Rong Mao","doi":"10.1016/j.jmoldx.2023.11.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As the number of genes associated with various germline disorders continues to grow, it is becoming more difficult for clinical laboratories to maintain separate assays for interrogating disease-focused gene panels. One solution to this challenge is termed slice testing, where capture backbone is used to analyze data specific to a set of genes, and for this article, we will focus on exome. A key advantage to this strategy is greater flexibility by adding genes as they become associated with disease or the ability to accommodate specific provider requests. Here, we provide expert consensus recommendations and results from an Association for Molecular Pathology–sponsored survey of clinical laboratories performing exome sequencing to compare a slice testing approach with traditional static gene panels and comprehensive exome analysis. We explore specific considerations for slices, including gene selection, analytic performance, coverage, quality, and interpretation. Our goal is to provide comprehensive guidance for clinical laboratories interested in designing and using slice tests as a diagnostic.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50128,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Molecular Diagnostics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525157823002933/pdfft?md5=77cd55be79b3b8d5d5f3748b49b642f4&pid=1-s2.0-S1525157823002933-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Slice Testing—Considerations from Ordering to Reporting\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey A. SoRelle , Birgit H. Funke , Celeste C. Eno , Jianling Ji , Avni Santani , Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir , Megan Wachsmann , Karen E. Wain , Rong Mao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmoldx.2023.11.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>As the number of genes associated with various germline disorders continues to grow, it is becoming more difficult for clinical laboratories to maintain separate assays for interrogating disease-focused gene panels. One solution to this challenge is termed slice testing, where capture backbone is used to analyze data specific to a set of genes, and for this article, we will focus on exome. A key advantage to this strategy is greater flexibility by adding genes as they become associated with disease or the ability to accommodate specific provider requests. Here, we provide expert consensus recommendations and results from an Association for Molecular Pathology–sponsored survey of clinical laboratories performing exome sequencing to compare a slice testing approach with traditional static gene panels and comprehensive exome analysis. We explore specific considerations for slices, including gene selection, analytic performance, coverage, quality, and interpretation. Our goal is to provide comprehensive guidance for clinical laboratories interested in designing and using slice tests as a diagnostic.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Molecular Diagnostics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525157823002933/pdfft?md5=77cd55be79b3b8d5d5f3748b49b642f4&pid=1-s2.0-S1525157823002933-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Molecular Diagnostics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525157823002933\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Molecular Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525157823002933","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Slice Testing—Considerations from Ordering to Reporting
As the number of genes associated with various germline disorders continues to grow, it is becoming more difficult for clinical laboratories to maintain separate assays for interrogating disease-focused gene panels. One solution to this challenge is termed slice testing, where capture backbone is used to analyze data specific to a set of genes, and for this article, we will focus on exome. A key advantage to this strategy is greater flexibility by adding genes as they become associated with disease or the ability to accommodate specific provider requests. Here, we provide expert consensus recommendations and results from an Association for Molecular Pathology–sponsored survey of clinical laboratories performing exome sequencing to compare a slice testing approach with traditional static gene panels and comprehensive exome analysis. We explore specific considerations for slices, including gene selection, analytic performance, coverage, quality, and interpretation. Our goal is to provide comprehensive guidance for clinical laboratories interested in designing and using slice tests as a diagnostic.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, the official publication of the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP), co-owned by the American Society for Investigative Pathology (ASIP), seeks to publish high quality original papers on scientific advances in the translation and validation of molecular discoveries in medicine into the clinical diagnostic setting, and the description and application of technological advances in the field of molecular diagnostic medicine. The editors welcome for review articles that contain: novel discoveries or clinicopathologic correlations including studies in oncology, infectious diseases, inherited diseases, predisposition to disease, clinical informatics, or the description of polymorphisms linked to disease states or normal variations; the application of diagnostic methodologies in clinical trials; or the development of new or improved molecular methods which may be applied to diagnosis or monitoring of disease or disease predisposition.