A comparison of five Illumina, Ion Torrent, and nanopore sequencing technology-based approaches for whole genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2
© 2023. The Author(s)..
Rapid identification of the rise and spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern remains critical for monitoring of the efficacy of diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, and control strategies. A wide range of SARS-CoV-2 next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods have been developed over the last years, but cross-sequence technology benchmarking studies have been scarce. In the current study, 26 clinical samples were sequenced using five protocols: AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina), EasySeq RC-PCR SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina/NimaGen), Ion AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Thermo Fisher), custom primer sets (Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT)), and capture probe-based viral metagenomics (Roche/Illumina). Studied parameters included genome coverage, depth of coverage, amplicon distribution, and variant calling. The median SARS-CoV-2 genome coverage of samples with cycle threshold (Ct) values of 30 and lower ranged from 81.6 to 99.8% for, respectively, the ONT protocol and Illumina AmpliSeq protocol. Correlation of coverage with PCR Ct values varied per protocol. Amplicon distribution signatures differed across the methods, with peak differences of up to 4 log10 at disbalanced positions in samples with high viral loads (Ct values ≤ 23). Phylogenetic analyses of consensus sequences showed clustering independent of the workflow used. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reads in relation to background sequences, as a (cost-)efficiency metric, was the highest for the EasySeq protocol. The hands-on time was the lowest when using EasySeq and ONT protocols, with the latter additionally having the shortest sequence runtime. In conclusion, the studied protocols differed on a variety of the studied metrics. This study provides data that assist laboratories when selecting protocols for their specific setting.
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2023 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:42 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology - 42(2023), 6 vom: 05. Juni, Seite 701-713 |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Carbo, Ellen C [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
---|
Themen: |
---|
Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 12.05.2023 Date Revised 12.05.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
---|
doi: |
10.1007/s10096-023-04590-0 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM355225263 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | NLM355225263 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20231226063912.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10096-023-04590-0 |2 doi | |
028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1184.xml |
035 | |a (DE-627)NLM355225263 | ||
035 | |a (NLM)37017810 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Carbo, Ellen C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 2 | |a A comparison of five Illumina, Ion Torrent, and nanopore sequencing technology-based approaches for whole genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a Date Completed 12.05.2023 | ||
500 | |a Date Revised 12.05.2023 | ||
500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
520 | |a © 2023. The Author(s). | ||
520 | |a Rapid identification of the rise and spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern remains critical for monitoring of the efficacy of diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, and control strategies. A wide range of SARS-CoV-2 next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods have been developed over the last years, but cross-sequence technology benchmarking studies have been scarce. In the current study, 26 clinical samples were sequenced using five protocols: AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina), EasySeq RC-PCR SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina/NimaGen), Ion AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Thermo Fisher), custom primer sets (Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT)), and capture probe-based viral metagenomics (Roche/Illumina). Studied parameters included genome coverage, depth of coverage, amplicon distribution, and variant calling. The median SARS-CoV-2 genome coverage of samples with cycle threshold (Ct) values of 30 and lower ranged from 81.6 to 99.8% for, respectively, the ONT protocol and Illumina AmpliSeq protocol. Correlation of coverage with PCR Ct values varied per protocol. Amplicon distribution signatures differed across the methods, with peak differences of up to 4 log10 at disbalanced positions in samples with high viral loads (Ct values ≤ 23). Phylogenetic analyses of consensus sequences showed clustering independent of the workflow used. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reads in relation to background sequences, as a (cost-)efficiency metric, was the highest for the EasySeq protocol. The hands-on time was the lowest when using EasySeq and ONT protocols, with the latter additionally having the shortest sequence runtime. In conclusion, the studied protocols differed on a variety of the studied metrics. This study provides data that assist laboratories when selecting protocols for their specific setting | ||
650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
650 | 4 | |a Benchmark | |
650 | 4 | |a SARS-CoV-2 | |
650 | 4 | |a Whole genome sequencing | |
700 | 1 | |a Mourik, Kees |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Boers, Stefan A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Munnink, Bas Oude |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Nieuwenhuijse, David |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Jonges, Marcel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Welkers, Matthijs R A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Matamoros, Sebastien |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a van Harinxma Thoe Slooten, Joost |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kraakman, Margriet E M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Karelioti, Evita |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a van der Meer, David |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Veldkamp, Karin Ellen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kroes, Aloys C M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Sidorov, Igor |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a de Vries, Jutte J C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology |d 1988 |g 42(2023), 6 vom: 05. Juni, Seite 701-713 |w (DE-627)NLM012620742 |x 1435-4373 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:42 |g year:2023 |g number:6 |g day:05 |g month:06 |g pages:701-713 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-023-04590-0 |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 42 |j 2023 |e 6 |b 05 |c 06 |h 701-713 |