Sex ratio biases in termites provide evidence for kin selection

Contains fulltext : 142755.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Molecular testing of tumor samples to guide treatment decisions is of increasing importance. Several drugs have been approved for treatment of molecularly defined subgroups of patients, and the number of agents requiring companion diagnostics for their prescription is expected to rapidly increase. The results of such testing directly influence the management of individual patients, with both false-negative and false-positive results being harmful for patients. In this respect, external quality assurance (EQA) programs are essential to guarantee optimal quality of testing. There are several EQA schemes available in Europe, but they vary in scope, size and execution. During a conference held in early 2012, medical oncologists, pathologists, geneticists, molecular biologists, EQA providers and representatives from pharmaceutical industries developed a guideline to harmonize the standards applied by EQA schemes in molecular pathology. The guideline comprises recommendations on the organization of an EQA scheme, defining the criteria for reference laboratories, requirements for EQA test samples and the number of samples that are needed for an EQA scheme. Furthermore, a scoring system is proposed and consequences of poor performance are formulated. Lastly, the contents of an EQA report, communication of the EQA results, EQA databases and participant manual are given

Recommendations for whole genome sequencing in diagnostics for rare diseases

In 2016, guidelines for diagnostic Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) have been published by EuroGentest in order to assist laboratories in the implementation and accreditation of NGS in a diagnostic setting. These guidelines mainly focused on Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) and targeted (gene panels) sequencing detecting small germline variants (Single Nucleotide Variants (SNVs) and insertions/deletions (indels)). Since then, Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) has been increasingly introduced in the diagnosis of rare diseases as WGS allows the simultaneous detection of SNVs, Structural Variants (SVs) and other types of variants such as repeat expansions. The use of WGS in diagnostics warrants the re-evaluation and update of previously published guidelines. This work was jointly initiated by EuroGentest and the Horizon2020 project Solve-RD. Statements from the 2016 guidelines have been reviewed in the context of WGS and updated where necessary. The aim of these recommendations is primarily to list the points to consider for clinical (laboratory) geneticists, bioinformaticians, and (non-)geneticists, to provide technical advice, aid clinical decision-making and the reporting of the results

HGVS Nomenclature in Practice: An Example from the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Scheme

Molecular Technology and Informatics for Personalised Medicine and Healt

Next generation diagnostic molecular pathology: Critical appraisal of quality assurance in Europe

Contains fulltext : 136387.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Tumor evaluation in pathology is more and more based on a combination of traditional histopathology and molecular analysis. Due to the rapid development of new cancer treatments that specifically target aberrant proteins present in tumor cells, treatment decisions are increasingly based on the molecular features of the tumor. Not only the number of patients eligible for targeted precision medicine, but also the number of molecular targets per patient and tumor type is rising. Diagnostic molecular pathology, the discipline that determines the molecular aberrations present in tumors for diagnostic, prognostic or predictive purposes, is faced with true challenges. The laboratories have to meet the need of comprehensive molecular testing using only limited amount of tumor tissue, mostly fixed in formalin and embedded in paraffin (FFPE), in short turnaround time. Choices must be made for analytical methods that provide accurate, reliable and cost-effective results. Validation of the test procedures and results is essential. In addition, participation and good performance in internal (IQA) and external quality assurance (EQA) schemes is mandatory. In this review, we critically evaluate the validation procedure for comprehensive molecular tests as well as the organization of quality assurance and assessment of competence of diagnostic molecular pathology laboratories within Europe

Recommendations for reporting results of diagnostic genomic testing

Results of clinical genomic testing must be reported in a clear, concise format to ensure they are understandable and interpretable. It is important laboratories are aware of the information which is essential to make sure the results are not open to misinterpretation. As genomic testing has continued to evolve over the past decade, the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) recommendations for reporting results of diagnostic genetic testing (biochemical, cytogenetic and molecular genetic) published in 2014 have been reviewed and updated to provide the genomic community with guidance on reporting unambiguous results.Hereditary cancer genetic

Tumor mutation burden testing: a survey of the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQN Path)

While tumour mutation burden (TMB) is emerging as a possible biomarker for immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), methods for testing have not been standardised as yet. In April 2019, the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQN Path) launched a survey to assess the current practice of TMB testing. Of the 127 laboratories that replied, 69 (54.3%) had already introduced TMB analysis for research purposes and/or clinical applications. Fifty laboratories (72.5%) used targeted sequencing, although a number of different panels were employed. Most laboratories tested formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded material (94.2%), while 18/69 (26%) tested also cell-free DNA. Fifty-five laboratories used both single nucleotide variants and indels for TMB calculation; 20 centers included only non-synonymous variants. In conclusion, the data from this survey indicate that multiple global laboratories were capable of rapidly introducing routine clinical TMB testing. However, the variability of testing methods raises concerns about the reproducibility of results among centers. © 2021, The Author(s)