Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: Comparison of Two Mappers and Influence in the Diagnostic Yield.
Biomed Res Int
; 2018: 9498140, 2018.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-29977923
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if the use of different mappers for NIPT may vary the results considerably. METHODS: Peripheral blood was collected from 217 pregnant women, 58 pathological (34 pregnancies with trisomy 21, 18 with trisomy 18, and 6 with trisomy 13) and 159 euploid. MPS was performed following a manufacturer's modified protocol of semiconductor sequencing. Obtained reads were mapped with two different software programs: TMAP and HPG-Aligner, comparing the results. RESULTS: Using TMAP, 57 pathological samples were correctly detected (sensitivity 98.28%, specificity 93.08%): 33 samples as trisomy 21 (sensitivity 97.06%, specificity 99.45%), 16 as trisomy 18 (sensibility 88.89%, specificity 93.97%), and 6 as trisomy 13 (sensibility 100%, specificity 100%). 11 false positives, 1 false negative, and 2 samples incorrectly identified were obtained. Using HPG-Aligner, all the 58 pathological samples were correctly identified (sensibility 100%, specificity 96.86%): 34 as trisomy 21 (sensibility 100%, specificity 98.91%), 18 as trisomy 18 (sensibility 100%, specificity 98.99%), and 6 as trisomy 13 (sensibility 100%, specificity 99.53%). 5 false positives were obtained. CONCLUSION: Different mappers use slightly different algorithms, so the use of one mapper or another with the same batch file can provide different results.
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Diagnóstico Pré-Natal
/
Trissomia
/
Sequenciamento de Nucleotídeos em Larga Escala
Tipo de estudo:
Diagnostic_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
Limite:
Adolescent
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Pregnancy
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Biomed Res Int
Ano de publicação:
2018
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Espanha