Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter March 2, 2010

Decision criteria for rational selection of homogeneous genotyping platforms for pharmacogenomics testing in clinical diagnostics

  • Raffaele Di Francia , Ferdinando Frigeri , Massimiliano Berretta , Erika Cecchin , Claudio Orlando , Antonio Pinto and Pamela Pinzani

Abstract

Background: Genotyping is crucial for the identification of genetic markers underlying the development of neoplastic diseases and for determining individual variations in response to specific drugs. Technologies which can accurately identify genetic polymorphisms will dramatically affect routine diagnostic processes and future therapeutic developments in personalized medicine. However, such methods need to fulfill the principles of analytical validation to determine their suitability to assess nucleotide polymorphisms in target genes.

Approach: This article reviews recent developments in homogeneous technologies for the genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms. Here, homogeneous methods essentially refer to “single-tube” assays performed in a liquid phase. For the appropriate choice of any method, several criteria must be considered: 1) detection of known genetic variations; 2) analytical performance including specificity, sensitivity and robustness of the method; 3) availability of large platforms and required equipment; 4) suitability of platforms and tests for routine diagnostics; 5) suitability for high throughput implementation.

Content: This review is intended to provide the reader with an understanding of these various technologies for pharmacogenomic testing in the routine clinical laboratory. A brief overview is provided on the available technologies for the detection of known mutations, a specific description of the homogeneous platforms currently employed in genotyping analysis, and considerations regarding the proper assessment of the analytical performance of these methods. Based on the criteria proposed here, potential users may evaluate advantages and limitations of the various analytical platforms and identify the most appropriate platform according to their specific setting and diagnostic needs.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:447–59.


Corresponding authors: Antonio Pinto and Raffaele Di Francia, Hematology-Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Unit, Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Fondazione “G. Pascale”, IRCCS, Via Mariano Semmola, 80131 Naples, Italy Phone: +39 81 5903 382/+39 81 5903 635, Fax: +39 81 5903 833, ;

Received: 2009-10-5
Accepted: 2009-12-11
Published Online: 2010-03-2
Published in Print: 2010-04-01

©2010 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York

Downloaded on 24.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/CCLM.2010.112/html
Scroll to top button