Evaluation of the Luminex ARIES HSV 1&2 Assay and Comparison with the FTD Neuro 9 and In-house Real-Time PCR Assays for Detecting Herpes Simplex Viruses.

BACKGROUND: Human herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) and type 2 (HSV-2) are responsible for a plethora of human diseases, of which cutaneous and mucocutaneous infections are the most prevalent. In its most severe form, HSV infection can cause meningitis/encephalitis. We compared the Luminex ARIES HSV 1&2 assay (Luminex Corp., Austin, TX, USA), an automated sample-to-result molecular solution, to two non-automated HSV DNA assays. METHODS: A total of 116 artificial controls were used to determine the analytical performance of the ARIES assay. Controls were prepared by spiking universal transport medium (UTM) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from patients who tested negative for HSV by an in-house HSV-1 and -2 DNA assay with reference materials (SeraCare Life Sciences, MA, USA; ZeptoMetrix Corp., MA, USA). Another 117 clinical samples were then used to compare the clinical performance of the ARIES assay with those of an in-house assay and the FTD Neuro 9 assay (Fast Track Diagnostics, Junglinster, Luxembourg). RESULTS: The analytical sensitivity (95% limit of detection) of the ARIES assay was 318 copies/mL (UTM samples) and 935 copies/mL (CSF samples) for HSV-1 strain 96 and 253 copies/mL (UTM samples) and 821 copies/mL (CSF samples) for HSV-2 strain 09. No cross-reactivity was observed in samples spiked with 14 non-HSV microorganisms. Compared with the reference result (agreement between the in-house and FTD Neuro 9 results), the ARIES assay had overall concordance rates of 98.2% (111/113) and 100% (113/113) for HSV-1 and HSV-2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ARIES assay appears to be an excellent alternative for rapid detection and differentiation of HSV in skin and genital infections, meningitis, and encephalitis.

Identification of novel fusion transcripts in multiple myeloma.

AIMS: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease characterised by genetically complex abnormalities. The classical mutational spectrum includes recurrent chromosomal aberrations and gene-level mutations. Recurrent translocations involving the IGH gene such as t(11;14), t(4;14) and t(14;16) are well known. However, the presence of complex genetic abnormalities raises the possibility that fusions other than the recurrent IGH translocations exist. We therefore employed a targeted RNA-sequencing panel to identify novel putative fusions in a local cohort of MM. METHODS: Targeted RNA-sequencing was performed on 21 patient samples using the Illumina TruSight RNA Pan-Cancer Panel (comprising 1385 genes). Fusion calls were generated from the Illumina RNA-Sequencing Alignment software (V.1.0.0). These samples had conventional cytogenetic and fluorescence in situ hybridisation data for the common recurrent chromosomal abnormalities (t(11;14), t(4;14), t(14;16) and 17p13 deletion). The MMRF CoMMpass dataset was analysed using the TopHat-fusion pipeline. RESULTS: A total of 10 novel fusions were identified by the TruSight RNA Pan-Cancer Panel. Two of these fusions, HGF/CACNA2D1 and SMC3/MXI1, were validated by reverse transcription PCR and Sanger sequencing as they involve genes that may have biological relevance in MM genesis. Four of these (MAP2K4/MAP2K4P1) are likely to be spurious secondary to misalignment of reads to a pseudogene. One record of the HGF/CACNA2D1 fusion was identified from the MMRF CoMMpass dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of novel fusions offers insights into the biology of MM and might have clinical relevance. Further functional studies are required to determine the biological and clinical relevance of these novel fusions.

CEBPA mutational analysis in acute myeloid leukaemia by a laboratory-developed next-generation sequencing assay.

AIM: The presence of biallelic CEBPA mutations is a favourable prognostic feature in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). CEBPA mutations are currently identified through conventional capillary sequencing (CCS). With the increasing adoption of next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms, challenges with regard to amplification efficiency of CEBPA due to the high GC content may be encountered, potentially resulting in suboptimal coverage. Here, the performance of an amplicon-based NGS method using a laboratory-developed CEBPA-specific Nextera XT (CEBNX) was evaluated. METHODS: Mutational analyses of the CEBPA gene of 137 AML bone marrow or peripheral blood retrospective specimens were performed by the amplification of the CEBPA gene using the Expand Long Range dNTPack and the amplicons processed by CCS and NGS. CEBPA-specific libraries were then constructed using the Nextera XT V.2 kit. All FASTQ files were then processed with the MiSeq Reporter V.2.6.2.3 using the PCR Amplicon workflow via the customised CEBPA-specific manifest file. The variant calling format files were analysed using the Illumina Variant Studio V.2.2. RESULTS: A coverage per base of 3631X to 28184X was achieved. 22 samples (16.1%) were found to contain CEBPA mutations, with variant allele frequencies (VAF) ranging from 3.8% to 58.2%. Taking CCS as the 'gold standard', sensitivity and specificity of 97% and 97% was achieved. For the transactivation domain 2 polymorphism (c.584_589dupACCCGC/p.His195_Pro196dup), the CEBNX achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity relative to CCS. CONCLUSIONS: Our laboratory-developed CEBNX workflow shows high coverage and thus overcomes the challenges associated with amplification efficiency and low coverage of CEBPA. Therefore, our assay is suitable for deployment in the clinical laboratory.

Coverage analysis in a targeted amplicon-based next-generation sequencing panel for myeloid neoplasms.

AIMS: PCR amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels are increasingly used for clinical diagnostic assays. Amplification bias is a well-known limitation of PCR amplicon-based approaches. We sought to characterise lower-performance amplicons in an off-the-shelf NGS panel (TruSight Myeloid Sequencing Panel) for myeloid neoplasms and attempted to patch the low read depth for one of the affected genes, CEBPA. METHODS: We performed targeted NGS of 158 acute myeloid leukaemia samples and analysed the amplicon read depths across 568 amplicons to identify lower-performance amplicons. We also correlated the amplicon read depths with the template GC content. Finally, we attempted to patch the low read depth for CEBPA using a parallel library preparation (Nextera XT) workflow. RESULTS: We identified 16 lower-performance amplicons affecting nine genes, including CEBPA. There was a slight negative correlation between the amplicon read depths and template GC content. Addition of the separate CEBPA library generated a minimum read depth per base across the CEBPA gene ranging from 268x to 758x across eight samples. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of lower-performance amplicons will be informative to laboratories intending to use this panel. We have also demonstrated proof-of-concept that different libraries (TruSight Myeloid and Nextera XT) can be combined and sequenced on the same flow cell to generate additional reads for CEBPA.