Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 461

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice

Open access
Gargis, Amy S, Kalman, Lisa, Berry, Meredith W, Bick, David P, Dimmock, David P, Hambuch, Tina, Lu, Fei, Lyon, Elaine, Voelkerding, Karl V, Zehnbauer, Barbara A, Agarwala, Richa, Bennett, Sarah F, Chen, Bin, Chin, Ephrem L H, Compton, John G, Das, Soma, Farkas, Daniel H, Ferber, Matthew J, Funke, Birgit H, Furtado, Manohar R, Ganova-Raeva, Lilia M, Geigenmüller, Ute, Gunselman, Sandra J, Hegde, Madhuri R, Johnson, Philip L F, Kasarskis, Andrew, Kulkarni, Shashikant, Lenk, Thomas, Liu, C S Jonathan, Manion, Megan, Manolio, Teri A, Mardis, Elaine R, Merker, Jason D, Rajeevan, Mangalathu S, Reese, Martin G, Rehm, Heidi L, Simen, Birgitte B, Yeakley, Joanne M, Zook, Justin M, Lubin, Ira M·2012·Nature Biotechnology

Abstract

To the Editor: We direct your readers’ attention to the principles and guidelines (Supplementary Guidelines) developed by the Nextgeneration Sequencing: Standardization of Clinical Testing (Nex-StoCT) workgroup. These guidelines represent initial steps to ensure that results from tests based on nextgeneration sequencing (NGS) are reliable and useful for clinical decision making. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened this national workgroup, which collaborated to define platform-independent approaches for establishing technical process elements of a quality management system (QMS) to assure the analytical validity and compliance of NGS tests with existing regulatory and professional quality standards. The workgroup identified and addressed gaps in quality practices that could compromise the quality of both clinical laboratory services and translational efforts needed to advance the implementation and utility of NGS in clinical settings. The workgroup was composed of experts with knowledge of and experience with NGS and included clinical laboratory directors, clinicians, platform and software developers and informaticians, as well as individuals actively engaged in NGS guideline development from accreditation bodies and professional organizations. Representatives from US government agencies also participated. These guidelines address four topics that are components of quality management in a clinical environment: (i) test validation, (ii) quality control (QC) procedures to assure and maintain accurate test results, (iii) the independent assessment of test performance through proficiency testing (PT) or alternative approaches and (iv) reference materials (RMs). Discussions were limited to the analytic and informatics processes required for accurate variant calling. The workgroup did not address how variants are prioritized, interpreted or reported. The workgroup recommendations are summarized in Table 1. Although the workgroup focused on detection of DNA sequence variations associated with heritable human disorders, many of the principles and recommendations described are also relevant to the application of NGS to other areas of laboratory medicine, including the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of cancer and infectious-disease testing. Validation is the process of establishing analytical performance specifications for a clinical test system developed in house to confirm that the system is suitable for its intended use1. During the validation process, the laboratory must demonstrate that the assay functions as expected and provides

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nbt.2403

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 55 references

Cited by

See all 461

Metadata

Authors
Gargis, A. S., Kalman, L., Berry, M. W., Bick, D. P., Dimmock, D. P., Hambuch, T., Lu, F., Lyon, E., Voelkerding, K. V., Zehnbauer, B. A., Agarwala, R., Bennett, S. F., Chen, B., Chin, E. L. H., Compton, J. G., Das, S., Farkas, D. H., Ferber, M. J., Funke, B. H., Furtado, M. R., Ganova-Raeva, L. M., Geigenmüller, U., Gunselman, S. J., Hegde, M. R., Johnson, P. L. F., Kasarskis, A., Kulkarni, S., Lenk, T., Liu, C. S. J., Manion, M., Manolio, T. A., Mardis, E. R., Merker, J. D., Rajeevan, M. S., Reese, M. G., Rehm, H. L., Simen, B. B., Yeakley, J. M., Zook, J. M., & Lubin, I. M.
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2012-11
Volume
30
Issue
11
Pages
1033-1036
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W2159265519
Cited by
461
References
55
FWCI
30.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nbt.2403
The paper
Gargis, A. S., Kalman, L., Berry, M. W., Bick, D. P., Dimmock, D. P., Hambuch, T., Lu, F., Lyon, E., Voelkerding, K. V., Zehnbauer, B. A., Agarwala, R., Bennett, S. F., Chen, B., Chin, E. L. H., Compton, J. G., Das, S., Farkas, D. H., Ferber, M. J., Funke, B. H., . . . Lubin, I. M. (2012). Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice. Nature Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2403

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.