Author
Listed:
- Bing-Sheng Li
- Xin-Ying Wang
- Feng-Li Ma
- Bo Jiang
- Xiao-Xiao Song
- An-Gao Xu
Abstract
Background: High Resolution Melting Analysis (HRMA) is becoming the preferred method for mutation detection. However, its accuracy in the individual clinical diagnostic setting is variable. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of HRMA for human mutations in comparison to DNA sequencing in different routine clinical settings, we have conducted a meta-analysis of published reports. Methodology/Principal Findings: Out of 195 publications obtained from the initial search criteria, thirty-four studies assessing the accuracy of HRMA were included in the meta-analysis. We found that HRMA was a highly sensitive test for detecting disease-associated mutations in humans. Overall, the summary sensitivity was 97.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 96.8–98.5; I2 = 27.0%). Subgroup analysis showed even higher sensitivity for non-HR-1 instruments (sensitivity 98.7% (95%CI: 97.7–99.3; I2 = 0.0%)) and an eligible sample size subgroup (sensitivity 99.3% (95%CI: 98.1–99.8; I2 = 0.0%)). HRMA specificity showed considerable heterogeneity between studies. Sensitivity of the techniques was influenced by sample size and instrument type but by not sample source or dye type. Conclusions/Significance: These findings show that HRMA is a highly sensitive, simple and low-cost test to detect human disease-associated mutations, especially for samples with mutations of low incidence. The burden on DNA sequencing could be significantly reduced by the implementation of HRMA, but it should be recognized that its sensitivity varies according to the number of samples with/without mutations, and positive results require DNA sequencing for confirmation.
Suggested Citation
Bing-Sheng Li & Xin-Ying Wang & Feng-Li Ma & Bo Jiang & Xiao-Xiao Song & An-Gao Xu, 2011.
"Is High Resolution Melting Analysis (HRMA) Accurate for Detection of Human Disease-Associated Mutations? A Meta Analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-9, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0028078
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028078
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0028078. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.