Target gene panel method versus whole-exome sequencing in detection of idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in males.
- Author:
Yan-Ju GUO
1
;
Yao-Man GUO
2
;
Ying HAN
2
;
Qiu-Yue WU
2
;
Yang YANG
2
;
Tao LUO
2
;
Xiao-Feng XU
1
;
Xin-Yi XIA
2
Author Information
1. School of Life Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210023, China.
2. PLA Research Institute of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital of Eastern Theater Command, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210002, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
gene panel;
whole-exon sequencing;
idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism
- MeSH:
Humans;
Hypogonadism/genetics*;
Male;
Whole Exome Sequencing
- From:
National Journal of Andrology
2021;27(10):899-903
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the efficiency of the target gene panel method and whole-exome sequencing (WES) in detecting idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (IHH), and select a more suitable gene detection method.
METHODS:We selected 24 genes closely related to the molecular pathogenesis of IHH to make up the gene panel, detected the mutation sites in 73 patients with IHH using the panel method, and verified the results of sequencing with the Sanger method. Using the key words "idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism", we searched databases for relevant literature, calculated the positive rate of IHH detected by WES and compared it with that detected with the panel method.
RESULTS:Of the 73 cases of IHH detected with the panel method, 7 were found with pathogenic mutations, including 2 cases of FGFR1, 2 cases of CHD7, 2 cases of KISS1R, and 1 case of NR5A1 mutation. Sanger sequencing showed that the positive rate of the panel method was 9.7%. Of the 1 336 articles retrieved, 5 met the inclusion criteria and were included, in which WES revealed a positive rate of about 30%.
CONCLUSIONS:For detection of the diseases with clear mutated genes, the panel method is relatively inexpensive and has a high sequencing depth, while for detection of the diseases with complicated genetic patterns and unclear mutated genes, WES is more efficient. Further studies are needed for choice of the two methods for different purpose of detection./.
