Nature Publishing Group, publisher of Nature, and other science journals and reference works NATURE.COM NATURE NEWS NATUREJOBS NATUREEVENTS ABOUT NPG
Help Nature.com site index  
European Journal of Human Genetics
SEARCH     advanced search my account e-alerts subscribe register
Journal home
Advance online publication
Current issue
Archive
Press releases
For authors
For referees
Contact editorial office
About the journal
About the society
For librarians
Subscribe
Advertising
naturereprints
Contact NPG
Customer services
Site features
NPG Subject areas
Access material from all our publications in your subject area:
Biotechnology Biotechnology
Cancer Cancer
Chemistry Chemistry
Dentistry Dentistry
Development Development
Drug Discovery Drug Discovery
Earth Sciences Earth Sciences
Evolution & Ecology Evolution & Ecology
Genetics Genetics
Immunology Immunology
Materials Materials Science
Medical Research Medical Research
Microbiology Microbiology
Molecular Cell Biology Molecular Cell Biology
Neuroscience Neuroscience
Pharmacology Pharmacology
Physics Physics
Browse all publications
 
March 1998, Volume 6, Number 2, Pages 165-175
Table of contents    Previous  Abstract  Next   Article  PDF
Original paper
Evaluation of CFTR gene mutation testing methods in 136 diagnostic laboratories: report of a large European external quality assessment
E Dequekera and J-J Cassiman

Center for Human Genetics, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium

aCorrespondence: Dr E Dequeker, Center for Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium. Tel: +32 16 34 58 60; Fax: +32 16 34 59 97; E-mail: els.dequeker@med.kuleuven.ac.be.

Abstract

Within the framework of the European Concerted Action on Cystic Fibrosis (Biomed-2, BMH4-CT96-0462) a quality assessment was set up for 135 European and one Australian laboratory. Six DNA samples were sent to the various laboratories. These samples carried the following CFTR genotypes: dF508/N1303K; dI507/wild; dF508/G551D; dF508/621 + 1 GtoT; R553X/wild and 1717-1 GtoA/wild. Each laboratory was asked to process the samples as they routinely do, whether they checked for all mutations or not. More than 75% of the laboratories screened for at least six of these mutations. Heteroduplex analysis was the most frequently used primary testing method (47%), in many instances followed by restriction enzyme digestion. Only a minority of the laboratories made use of a commercial CFTR mutation detection kit. On average, 91% of the laboratories correctly typed both alleles of a given DNA sample. However, 35% of the laboratories incorrectly typed one or more alleles from a total of 12 alleles included in the trial. One laboratory even failed to identify four of the different alleles correctly. The genotyping error frequency tended to be lower in laboratories which perform more than 200 CFTR mutation analyses per year. The results of this quality control trial suggest that there are many laboratories (35%) which have a percentage of errors unacceptable in a routine testing setting. The development of a consensus testing strategy for routine diagnostic laboratories and centralised mutation analysis facilities for rare or country-specific mutations in a limited number of expert centres, in combination with regular training sessions and quality assessments, should further improve genotyping.

Keywords

cystic fibrosis; CFTR; quality control; mutation testing

Received 3 September 1997; revised 22 December 1997; accepted 13 January 1998
March 1998, Volume 6, Number 2, Pages 165-175
Table of contents    Previous  Abstract  Next   Article  PDF
Privacy Policy © 1998 Nature Publishing Group