A Cross-Sectional Study of Variant Interpretation and Reporting of NGS Data Using Tertiary Analysis Software: Navify® Mutation Profiler

IntroductionPersonalized medicine has revolutionized the clinical management of patients with solid tumors. However, the large volumes of molecular data derived from next-generation sequencing (NGS) and the lack of harmonized bioinformatics pipelines drastically impact the clinical management of patients with solid tumors. A possible solution to streamline the molecular interpretation and reporting of NGS data would be to adopt automated data analysis software. In this study, we tested the clinical efficiency of the Navify Mutation Profiler (nMP) software in improving the interpretation of NGS data analysis in diagnostic routine samples from patients with solid tumors. MethodsThis study included one coordinating institution (Federico II University of Naples) and five other Italian institutions. Variant call format (VCF) files from reference standard samples previously tested by the coordinating institution and from n = 8 diagnostic routine samples (n = 2 from colorectal carcinoma; n = 2 from non-small cell lung cancer; n = 2 from advanced melanoma; and n = 2 from patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors) and previously analyzed by each participating institution (n = 5) with standardized internal analysis workflows were uploaded onto the Navify (R) Mutation Profiler (nMP) system (Roche Sequencing Solutions, Pleasanton, CA, USA) for automated analysis and interpretation of DNA and RNA molecular alterations analytical parameters, molecular profiling, and clinical interpretation were carried out by the nMP system and compared with the standard workflow data analyzed by the participating institutions. ResultsOverall, all VCF files were successfully submitted and interpreted by the nMP system. A concordance agreement rate of 89.6% was observed between the automated and standard workflow systems. In particular, DNA and RNA molecular profiles obtained with the nMP system matched those obtained with standardized approaches in 44 out of 48 patients (91.7%) and in 11 out of 12 (91.7%) cases, respectively. In addition, the nMP system evidenced wild-type variants in 6 out of 7 (85.7%) cases. ConclusionsThe nMP system represents a valid, easily manageable, and clinically useful system to interpret NGS data on diagnostic routine samples from patients with solid tumors.