Biology subjects

Shraga, R.

Publications and source records attributed to Shraga, R..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2018

Comprehensive Genetic Testing for Female and Male Infertility Using Next Generation Sequencing

ObjectiveTo develop a comprehensive genetic test for female and male infertility in support of medical decisions during assisted reproductive technology (ART) protocols.\n\nDesignRetrospective analysis of results from 118 DNA samples with known variants in loci representative of female and male infertility.\n\nInterventions(s)None\n\nMain Outcome Measure(s)Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) of 87 genes including promoters, 5 and 3 untranslated regions, exons and selected introns. In addition, sex chromosome aneuploidies and Y chromosome microdeletions are analyzed concomitantly using the same panel.\n\nResultsAnalytical accuracy was >99%, with >98% sensitivity for Single Nucleotide Variants (SNVs) and >91% sensitivity for insertions/deletions (indels). Clinical sensitivity was assessed with samples containing variants representative of male and female infertility, and it was 100% for SNVs/indels, CFTR IVS8-5T variants, sex chromosome aneuploidies and Copy Number Variants (CNVs), and >93% for Y chromosome microdeletions. Cost analysis comparing the NGS assay with standard, multiple analysis approach, shows potential savings of $2723 per case. Conclusion: A single, comprehensive, NGS panel can simplify the ordering process for healthcare providers, reduce turnaround time, and lower the overall cost of testing for genetic assessment of infertility in females and males, while maintaining accuracy.

genomics↗

bioRxiv2017

Evaluating genetic ancestry and self-reported ethnicity in the context of carrier screening

BackgroundCurrent professional society guidelines recommend genetic carrier screening be offered on the basis of ethnicity, or when using expanded carrier screening panels, they recommend to compute residual risk based on ethnicity. We investigated the reliability of self-reported ethnicity in 9138 subjects referred to carrier screening. Self-reported ethnicity gathered from test requisition forms and during post-test genetic counseling, and genetic ancestry predicted by a statistical model, were compared for concordance.\n\nResultsWe identified several discrepancies between the two sources of self-reported ethnicity and genetic ancestry. Only 30.3% of individuals who indicated Mediterranean ancestry during consultation self-reported this on requisition forms. Additionally, the proportion of individuals who reported Southeast Asian but were estimated to have a different genetic ancestry was found to depend on the source of self-report. Finally, individuals who reported Latin American demonstrated a high degree of ancestral admixture. As a result, carrier rates and residual risks provided for patient decision-making are impacted if using self-reported ethnicity.\n\nConclusionOur analysis highlights the unreliability of ethnicity classification based on patient self-reports. We recommend the routine use of pan-ethnic carrier screening panels in reproductive medicine. Furthermore, the use of an ancestry model would allow better estimation of carrier rates and residual risks.

genetics↗