4.7 Article

External Quality Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Sequencing: an ESGMD-SSM Pilot Trial across 15 European Laboratories

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01698-21

Keywords

NGS; external quality assessment; ring trial; whole-genome sequencing

Categories

Funding

  1. B-FAST [Fkz 01KX2021]
  2. Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany (Bundesministeriumfur Bildung und Forschung [BMBF])

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This pilot external quality assessment aimed to improve pathogen surveillance sequencing by establishing a framework between laboratories. Participating laboratories used different methods and analysis pipelines, but most were able to generate complete genomes. There was consensus on the majority of reporting criteria, although discrepancies were found in lineage and cluster assignments. The pilot program was considered successful, highlighting the high quality of participating laboratories and providing valuable feedback.
This first pilot trial on external quality assessment (EQA) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) whole-genome sequencing, initiated by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Genomic and Molecular Diagnostics (ESGMD) and the Swiss Society for Microbiology (SSM), aims to build a framework between laboratories in order to improve pathogen surveillance sequencing. Ten samples with various viral loads were sent out to 15 clinical laboratories that had free choice of sequencing methods and bioinformatic analyses. The key aspects on which the individual centers were compared were the identification of (i) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and indels, (ii) Pango lineages, and (iii) clusters between samples. The participating laboratories used a wide array of methods and analysis pipelines. Most were able to generate whole genomes for all samples. Genomes were sequenced to various depths (up to a 100-fold difference across centers). There was a very good consensus regarding the majority of reporting criteria, but there were a few discrepancies in lineage and cluster assignments. Additionally, there were inconsistencies in variant calling. The main reasons for discrepancies were missing data, bioinformatic choices, and interpretation of data. The pilot EQA was overall a success. It was able to show the high quality of participating laboratories and provide valuable feedback in cases where problems occurred, thereby improving the sequencing setup of laboratories. A larger follow-up EQA should, however, improve on defining the variables and format of the report. Additionally, contamination and/or minority variants should be a further aspect of assessment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available