病例报告:变体调用管道选择对分子诊断结果影响的案例研究。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Frontiers in Oncology Pub Date : 2024-10-31 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fonc.2024.1422811
Rostislav Skitchenko, Sergey Smirnov, Mikhail Krapivin, Anna Smirnova, Mykyta Artomov, Alexander Loboda, Yulia Dinikina
{"title":"病例报告:变体调用管道选择对分子诊断结果影响的案例研究。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Case report: A case study of variant calling pipeline selection effect on the molecular diagnostics outcome.

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.

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
Frontiers in Oncology
Frontiers in Oncology Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.60%
发文量
6641
审稿时长
14 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Integrated surgical intervention for intradural extramedullary hemangioblastoma of the cervical spine: a case report and literature review. Optimal hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimen for advanced and peritoneal metastatic gastric cancer: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Retraction: MiR-365a-3p-mediated regulation of HELLS/GLUT1 axis suppresses aerobic glycolysis and gastric cancer growth. Prognostic significance of collagen content in solitary fibrous tumors of the central nervous system. Selective uterine artery embolization is a valid adjuvant treatment of choriocarcinoma: a case report and literature review.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1