Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27342108›Full record

ArticleMolecular diagnosis & therapy2016

Inter-Laboratory Evaluation of a Next-Generation Sequencing Panel for Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Karl Haslam, Mark A Catherwood, Edwina Dobbin, Anne Sproul, Stephen E Langabeer, Ken I Mills

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Targeted next-generation sequencing identifies clinically relevant mutations in patients with chronic neutrophilic leukemia at diagnosis and blast crisis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Chronic Myeloid Leukemia with an e6a2Case reports in hematology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Karl HaslamCancer Molecular Diagnostics, Central Pathology Laboratory, St. James's Hospital, Dublin 8, Ireland. khaslam@stjames.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-0042-7947
Mark A CatherwoodCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queens University, Belfast, UK.
Edwina DobbinDepartment of Haematology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
Anne SproulDepartment of Haematology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
Stephen E LangabeerCancer Molecular Diagnostics, Central Pathology Laboratory, St. James's Hospital, Dublin 8, Ireland.
Ken I MillsCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queens University, Belfast, UK.
Queen's University Belfast · GBSt. James's Hospital · IEWestern General Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous clonal disorder often associated with dismal overall survival. The clinical diversity of AML is reflected in the range of recurrent somatic mutations in several genes, many of which have a prognostic and therapeutic value. Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) of these genes has the potential for translation into clinical practice. In order to assess this potential, an inter-laboratory evaluation of a commercially available AML gene panel across three diagnostic centres in the UK and Ireland was performed.

methodsDNA from six AML patient samples was distributed to each centre and processed using a standardised workflow, including a common sequencing platform, sequencing chips and bioinformatics pipeline. A duplicate sample in each centre was run to assess inter- and intra-laboratory performance.

resultsAn average sample read depth of 2725X (range 629-5600) was achieved using six samples per chip, with some variability observed in the depth of coverage generated for individual samples and between centres. A total of 16 somatic mutations were detected in the six AML samples, with a mean of 2.7 mutations per sample (range 1-4) representing nine genes on the panel. 15/16 mutations were identified by all three centres. Allelic frequencies of the mutations ranged from 5.6 to 53.3 % (median 44.4 %), with a high level of concordance of these frequencies between centres, for mutations detected.

conclusionIn this inter-laboratory comparison, a high concordance, reproducibility and robustness was demonstrated using a commercially available NGS AML gene panel and platform.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingAllelesDNA Mutational AnalysisGene FrequencyHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMutationReagent Kits, DiagnosticReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkers, TumorReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID27342108
OpenAlexW2465217728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.