RT Journal Article
T1 Helpful Criteria When Implementing NGS Panels in Childhood Lymphoblastic Leukemia.
A1 Vega-Garcia, Nerea
A1 Benito, Rocío
A1 Esperanza-Cebollada, Elena
A1 Llop, Marta
A1 Robledo, Cristina
A1 Vicente-Garcés, Clara
A1 Alonso, Javier
A1 Barragán, Eva
A1 Fernández, Guerau
A1 Hernández-Sánchez, Jesús M
A1 Martín-Izquierdo, Marta
A1 Maynou, Joan
A1 Minguela, Alfredo
A1 Montaño, Adrián
A1 Ortega, Margarita
A1 Torrebadell, Montserrat
A1 Cervera, José
A1 Sánchez, Joaquín
A1 Jiménez-Velasco, Antonio
A1 Riesco, Susana
A1 Hernández-Rivas, Jesús M
A1 Lassaletta, Álvaro
A1 Fernández, José María
A1 Rives, Susana
A1 Dapena, José Luis
A1 Ramírez, Manuel
A1 Camós, Mireia
A1 On Behalf Of The Group Of Leukemia Of The Spanish Society Of Pediatric Hematology And Oncology Sehop, 
K1 NGS-targeted panel
K1 childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia
K1 next-generation sequencing
AB The development of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) has provided useful diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic strategies for individualized management of B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL) patients. Consequently, NGS is rapidly being established in clinical practice. However, the technology's complexity, bioinformatics analysis, and the different available options difficult a broad consensus between different laboratories in its daily routine introduction. This collaborative study among Spanish centers was aimed to assess the feasibility, pros, and cons of our customized panel and other commercial alternatives of NGS-targeted approaches. The custom panel was tested in three different sequencing centers. We used the same samples to assess other commercial panels (OncomineTM Childhood Cancer Research Assay; Archer®FusionPlex® ALL, and Human Comprehensive Cancer Panel GeneRead Panel v2®). Overall, the panels showed a good performance in different centers and platforms, but each NGS approach presented some issues, as well as pros and cons. Moreover, a previous consensus on the analysis and reporting following international guidelines would be preferable to improve the concordance in results among centers. Our study shows the challenges posed by NGS methodology and the need to consider several aspects of the chosen NGS-targeted approach and reach a consensus before implementing it in daily practice.
SN 2075-4426
YR 2020
FD 2020-11-26
LK https://hdl.handle.net/10668/24581
UL https://hdl.handle.net/10668/24581
LA en
DS RISalud
RD Apr 7, 2025