We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of Optical Genome Mapping With Conventional Diagnostic Methods for Structural Variant Detection in Hematologic Malignancies.
Annals of Laboratory Medicine 2024 March 5
BACKGROUND: Structural variants (SVs) are currently analyzed using a combination of conventional methods; however, this approach has limitations. Optical genome mapping (OGM), an emerging technology for detecting SVs using a single-molecule strategy, has the potential to replace conventional methods. We compared OGM with conventional diagnostic methods for detecting SVs in various hematologic malignancies.
METHODS: Residual bone marrow aspirates from 27 patients with hematologic malignancies in whom SVs were observed using conventional methods (chromosomal banding analysis, FISH, an RNA fusion panel, and reverse transcription PCR) were analyzed using OGM. The concordance between the OGM and conventional method results was evaluated.
RESULTS: OGM showed concordance in 63% (17/27) and partial concordance in 37% (10/27) of samples. OGM detected 76% (52/68) of the total SVs correctly (concordance rate for each type of SVs: aneuploidies, 83% [15/18]; balanced translocation, 80% [12/15] unbalanced translocation, 54% [7/13] deletions, 81% [13/16]; duplications, 100% [2/2] inversion 100% [1/1]; insertion, 100% [1/1]; marker chromosome, 0% [0/1]; isochromosome, 100% [1/1]). Sixteen discordant results were attributed to the involvement of centromeric/telomeric regions, detection sensitivity, and a low mapping rate and coverage. OGM identified additional SVs, including submicroscopic SVs and novel fusions, in five cases.
CONCLUSIONS: OGM shows a high level of concordance with conventional diagnostic methods for the detection of SVs and can identify novel variants, suggesting its potential utility in enabling more comprehensive SV analysis in routine diagnostics of hematologic malignancies, although further studies and improvements are required.
METHODS: Residual bone marrow aspirates from 27 patients with hematologic malignancies in whom SVs were observed using conventional methods (chromosomal banding analysis, FISH, an RNA fusion panel, and reverse transcription PCR) were analyzed using OGM. The concordance between the OGM and conventional method results was evaluated.
RESULTS: OGM showed concordance in 63% (17/27) and partial concordance in 37% (10/27) of samples. OGM detected 76% (52/68) of the total SVs correctly (concordance rate for each type of SVs: aneuploidies, 83% [15/18]; balanced translocation, 80% [12/15] unbalanced translocation, 54% [7/13] deletions, 81% [13/16]; duplications, 100% [2/2] inversion 100% [1/1]; insertion, 100% [1/1]; marker chromosome, 0% [0/1]; isochromosome, 100% [1/1]). Sixteen discordant results were attributed to the involvement of centromeric/telomeric regions, detection sensitivity, and a low mapping rate and coverage. OGM identified additional SVs, including submicroscopic SVs and novel fusions, in five cases.
CONCLUSIONS: OGM shows a high level of concordance with conventional diagnostic methods for the detection of SVs and can identify novel variants, suggesting its potential utility in enabling more comprehensive SV analysis in routine diagnostics of hematologic malignancies, although further studies and improvements are required.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app