1 / 15

Current methods for high-throughput resequencing of custom targets

Current methods for high-throughput resequencing of custom targets. Adam Gordon Nickerson Lab, UW Genome Sciences WHI Genetics SIG call 3/26/14. Targeted sequencing: Why?. Genome sequencing is decreasing in cost, but still expensive (and slow)

catori
Télécharger la présentation

Current methods for high-throughput resequencing of custom targets

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Current methods for high-throughput resequencing of custom targets Adam Gordon Nickerson Lab, UW Genome Sciences WHI Genetics SIG call 3/26/14

  2. Targeted sequencing: Why? • Genome sequencing is decreasing in cost, but still expensive (and slow) • Genotyping is cheap and quick, but is limited to a subset of human variation • Targeted sequencing is a middle ground • High-throughput, cost-effective variant typing and discovery on genomic regions of interest • 3 approaches in the Nickerson Lab: Custom Capture, Custom Amplicon, Molecular Inversion Probes (MIPs)

  3. Custom Capture -- Method Pool Barcoded libraryprep Hyb. biotinprobes streptavidinbead cleanup wash elute Multiplexed sequencing captured DNA

  4. Custom Capture -- Details • Price: $150-$250 per sample depending on target size and sample number • Throughput: 24-96 samples per lane • Strengths: • Highest quality data • ‘oldest’ method: robust protocols/software/data analysis pipelines • Weaknesses: • Priciest of the 3 methods • Hybridization-based capture can have issues with complex / repetitive regions

  5. PGRNseq: custom capture of pharmacogenetic targets • Target: 84 PGx-associated genes (exons + UTRs + 1.5kb upstream/downstream) • ~1 Mb total • Price: $230 / sample (for ~200 samples) PGRNseq testing: 32 diverse HapMap trios

  6. Custom Amplicon -- Method

  7. Custom Amplicon -- Details • Price: $100-$200 per sample depending on target size and sample number • Throughput: 24-96 samples per lane • Strengths: • Cheaper than capture • Extension-ligation could potentially help with sequencing complex regions • Weaknesses: • Newer than capture: not a lot of data out there yet • Data quality not quite as good as capture • PCR based: some regions cannot be designed

  8. MIPs -- Method

  9. MIPs -- Method

  10. MIPs -- Method

  11. MIPs -- Details • Price: $50-$150 per sample depending on target size and sample number • Throughput: 48-96+ samples per lane • Strengths: • Highest-throughput of the 3 methods • Cost scales extremely well with sample number • Linked probe design reduces erroneous capture • Weaknesses: • Design pipelines not as robust • Newer than capture: not a lot of data out there yet

  12. PGx13: MIP-based capture of pharmacogenetic targets • 13 highest priority, actionable PGx targets • Exons, UTRs, 1.5kb up/downstream • All variants in these genes with level 1 evidence (PharmGKB) • ~100 kB total • Price: $130/sample (for ~200 samples) PGx13 testing: 32 diverse HapMap trios

  13. Comparing all 3 methods: same sample, different capture max = 189x Custom Amplicon* max = 2698x Custom Capture max = 1452x MIPs *this data from an older version of Illumina’s Custom Amp protocol

  14. Some regions are just plain difficult Custom Amplicon* Custom Capture MIPs Pseudogene Pseudogene CYP2D6 Sequence homology, repeat content, and %GC can hinder all capture methods

  15. Comparing all 3 methods • Highest quality data: Capture • Cheapest overall: MIPs • Highest throughput: MIPs • Custom Amplicon potentially a middle ground, but data from most recent kit is scant

More Related