Investigating a common approach to DNA profile interpretation using probabilistic software

An inter-laboratory comparison of probabilistic genotyping parameters and evaluation of performance on DNA mixtures from different laboratories

Probabilistic genotyping (PG) is becoming the preferred standard for evidence interpretation, amongst forensic DNA laboratories, especially those in the United States. Various groups have expressed concern about reliability of PG systems, especially for mixtures beyond two contributors. Studies involving interlaboratory testing of known mixtures have been identified as ways to evaluate the reliability of PG systems. Reliability means different things in different contexts. However, it suffices here to think about it as a mixture of precision and accuracy. We might also consider whether a system is prone to producing misleading results - for example large likelihood ratios (LRs) when the POI is truly not a contributor, or small LRs when the POI is a truly a contributor. In this paper we show that the PG system STRmix™ is relatively unaffected by differences in parameter settings. That is, a DNA mixture that is analyzed in different laboratories using STRmix™ will result in different LRs, but less than 0.05% of these LRs would result in a different, or misleading conclusion as long as the LR is greater than 50. For the purposes of this study, we define LRs assigned using different parameters for the same mixtures as similar if the LR of the true POI is greater than the LRs generated for 99.9% of the general population. These findings are based on an interlaboratory study involving eight laboratories that provided twenty known DNA mixtures of two to four contributors and their individual laboratory STRmix™ parameters. The eight sets of laboratory parameters included differences in STR kits and PCR cycles as well as the peak, stutter, and locus specific amplification efficiency variances.

DEPArray™ single-cell technology: A validation study for forensic applications

In forensics investigations, it is common to encounter biological mixtures consisting of homogeneous or heterogeneous components from multiple individuals and with different genetic contributions. One promising mixture deconvolution strategy is the DEPArray™ technology, which enables the separation of cell populations before genetic analysis. While technological advances are fundamental, their reliable validation is crucial for successful implementation and use for casework. Thus, this study aimed to 1) systematically validate the DEPArray™ system concerning specificity, sensitivity, repeatability, and contamination occurrences for blood, epithelial, and sperm cells, and 2) evaluate its potential for single-cell analysis in the field of forensic science. Our findings confirmed the effective identification of different cell types and the correct assignment of successfully genotyped single cells to their respective donor(s). Using the NGM Detect™ Amplification Kit, the average profile completeness for diploid cells was approximately 80%, with ∼ 290 RFUs. In contrast, haploid sperm analysis yielded an average completeness of 51% referring to the haploid reference profile, accompanied by mean peak heights of ∼ 176 RFUs. Although certain alleles of heterozygous loci in diploid cells showed strong imbalances, the overall peak balances yielded acceptable values above ≥ 60% with a mean value of 72% ± 0.21, a median of 77%, but with a maximum imbalance of 9% between heterozygous peaks. Locus dropouts were considered stochastic events, exhibiting variations among donors and cell types, with a notable failure incidence observed for TH01. Within the wet-lab experimentation with >500 single cells for the validation, profiling was performed using the consensus approach, where profiles were selected randomly from all data to better mirror real casework results. Nevertheless, complete profiles could be achieved with as few as three diploid cells, while the average success rate increased to 100% when using profiles of 6-10 cells. For sperms, however, a consensus profile with completeness >90% of the autosomal diploid genotype could be attained using ≥15 cells. In addition, the robustness of the consensus approach was evaluated in the absence of the respective reference profile without severe deterioration. Here, increased stutter peaks (≥ 15%) were found as the main artifact in single-cell profiles, while contamination and drop-ins were ascertained as rare events. Lastly, the technique's potential and limitations are discussed, and practical guidance is provided, particularly valuable for cold cases, multiple perpetrator rapes, and analyses of homogeneous mixed evidence.

Exploring likelihood ratios assigned for siblings of the true mixture contributor as an alternate contributor

Relatives tend to have more DNA in common than unrelated people. The closer the biological relationship, the higher the chance of alleles being identical by descent between the individuals. Therefore, when considering a mixed DNA profile, close relatives of the true contributor may not always be excluded as a possible contributor to a mixture due to allele sharing. In these situations, it might be more appropriate under the alternate proposition to consider that the DNA could have originated from a relative of the person of interest rather than an unrelated individual. The probabilistic genotyping software STRmix™ automatically provides LRs considering close biological relatives as alternate sources of the DNA. In this paper, we investigate the support for siblings of the true contributor to a mixture (who are not present in the mixture themselves). We interpret the mixtures and assign LRs using STRmix™ and investigate whether the resulting LRs could be used to indicate whether the true contributor could be a sibling of the POI. Most siblings will have one or more alleles that are not observed in the mixture profile. Support for siblings to have contributed can only occur when allelic dropout is a possibility at the loci where the siblings have alleles that are not observed in the profile. In these data, that was only observed in components with assigned template of 588 rfu or less.

A Review of Probabilistic Genotyping Systems: EuroForMix, DNAStatistX and STRmix™

Probabilistic genotyping has become widespread. EuroForMix and DNAStatistX are both based upon maximum likelihood estimation using a γ model, whereas STRmix™ is a Bayesian approach that specifies prior distributions on the unknown model parameters. A general overview is provided of the historical development of probabilistic genotyping. Some general principles of interpretation are described, including: the application to investigative vs. evaluative reporting; detection of contamination events; inter and intra laboratory studies; numbers of contributors; proposition setting and validation of software and its performance. This is followed by details of the evolution, utility, practice and adoption of the software discussed.

Developments in forensic DNA analysis

The analysis of DNA from biological evidence recovered in the course of criminal investigations can provide very powerful evidence when a recovered profile matches one found on a DNA database or generated from a suspect. However, when no profile match is found, when the amount of DNA in a sample is too low, or the DNA too degraded to be analysed, traditional STR profiling may be of limited value. The rapidly expanding field of forensic genetics has introduced various novel methodologies that enable the analysis of challenging forensic samples, and that can generate intelligence about the donor of a biological sample. This article reviews some of the most important recent advances in the field, including the application of massively parallel sequencing to the analysis of STRs and other marker types, advancements in DNA mixture interpretation, particularly the use of probabilistic genotyping methods, the profiling of different RNA types for the identification of body fluids, the interrogation of SNP markers for predicting forensically relevant phenotypes, epigenetics and the analysis of DNA methylation to determine tissue type and estimate age, and the emerging field of forensic genetic genealogy. A key challenge will be for researchers to consider carefully how these innovations can be implemented into forensic practice to ensure their potential benefits are maximised.

Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset

A likelihood ratio (LR) system is defined as the entire pipeline of the measurement and interpretation processes where probabilistic genotyping software (PGS) is a piece of the whole LR system. To gain understanding on how two LR systems perform, a total of 154 two-person, 147 three-person, and 127 four-person mixture profiles of varying DNA quality, DNA quantity, and mixture ratios were obtained from the filtered (.CSV) files of the GlobalFiler 29 cycles 15s PROVEDIt dataset and deconvolved in two independently developed fully continuous programs, STRmix v2.6 and EuroForMix v2.1.0. Various parameters were set in each software and LR computations obtained from the two software were based on same/fixed EPG features, same pair of propositions, number of contributors, theta, and population allele frequencies. The ability of each LR system to discriminate between contributor (H1-true) and non-contributor (H2-true) scenarios was evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. Differences in the numeric LR values and their corresponding verbal classifications between the two LR systems were compared. The magnitude of the differences in the assigned LRs and the potential explanations for the observed differences greater than or equal to 3 on the log10 scale were described. Cases of LR < 1 for H1-true tests and LR > 1 for H2-true tests were also discussed. Our intent is to demonstrate the value of using a publicly available ground truth known mixture dataset to assess discrimination performance of any LR system and show the steps used to understand similarities and differences between different LR systems. We share our observations with the forensic community and describe how examining more than one PGS with similar discrimination power can be beneficial, help analysts compare interpretation especially with low-template profiles or minor contributor cases, and be a potential additional diagnostic check even if software in use does contain certain diagnostic statistics as part of the output.

Statistefix 4.0: A novel probabilistic software tool

Latest innovations indicate that continuous tools are promising DNA trace assessment methods. In this study, we present the continuous software solution Statistefix 4.0. The software supports DNA experts in deducing DNA profiles for database queries and can help to preselect DNA samples suitable for further processing using advanced probabilistic search engines. The novel tool weights genotype contributions and deduces major contributors from high- and low-quality DNA traces. Peak height, degradation, stutter as well as allelic drop-in/-out events are incorporated in the statistical model. We analyzed reference and casework samples as well as artificially generated mixture samples for software evaluation. The tool offers the completely automated assessment of reference and mixture samples. Deconvolution outcomes of mixtures are compared with EuroForMix, GenoProof Mixture 3 and STRmix™. Data show that Statistefix 4.0 is as successful as analogously tested and implemented software. Deduced DNA profiles from casework samples highlight the potential benefit in routine casework. Statistefix 4.0 is freely available, works with replicates of different autosomal kits and enables bulk sample processing. This inter-laboratory study includes a variety of sample types and indicates a timesaving, robust and easily implemented software that supports DNA analysts in evaluating DNA traces.

Uncertainty in estimating the number of contributors from simulated DNA mixture profiles, with and without allele dropout, from Chinese, Malay, Indian, and Caucasian ethnic populations

Determining the number of contributors (NOC) accurately in a forensic DNA mixture profile can be challenging. To address this issue, there have been various studies that examined the uncertainty in estimating the NOC in a DNA mixture profile. However, the focus of these studies lies primarily on dominant populations residing within Europe and North America. Thus, there is limited representation of Asian populations in these studies. Further, the effects of allele dropout on the NOC estimation has not been explored. As such, this study assesses the uncertainty of NOC in simulated DNA mixture profiles of Chinese, Malay, and Indian populations, which are the predominant ethnic populations in Asia. The Caucasian ethnic population was also included to provide a basis of comparison with other similar studies. Our results showed that without considering allele dropout, the NOC from DNA mixture profiles derived from up to four contributors of the same ethnic population could be estimated with confidence in the Chinese, Malay, Indian and Caucasian populations. The same results can be observed on DNA mixture profiles originating from a combination of differing ethnic populations. The inclusion of an overall 30% allele dropout rate increased the probability (risk) of underestimating the NOC in a DNA mixture profile; even a 3-person DNA mixture profile has a > 99% risk of underestimating the NOC as two or fewer contributors. However, such risks could be mitigated when the highly polymorphic SE33 locus was included in the dataset. Lastly there was a negligible level of risk in misinterpreting the NOC in a mixture profile as deriving from a single source profile. In summary, our studies showcased novel results representative of the Chinese, Malay, and Indian ethnic populations when examining the uncertainty in NOC estimation in a DNA mixture profile. Our results would be useful in the estimation of NOC in a DNA mixture profile in the Asian context.

Application of a probabilistic genotyping software to MPS mixture STR data is supported by similar trends in LRs compared with CE data

The interpretation of short tandem repeat (STR) profiles can be challenging when, for example, alleles are masked due to allele sharing among contributors and/or when they are subject to drop-out, for instance from sample degradation. Mixture interpretation can be improved by increasing the number of STRs and/or loci with a higher discriminatory power. Both capillary electrophoresis (CE, 6-dye) and massively parallel sequencing (MPS) provide a platform for analysing relatively large numbers of autosomal STRs. In addition, MPS enables distinguishing between sequence variants, resulting in enlarged discriminatory power. Also, MPS allows for small amplicon sizes for all loci as spacing is not an issue, which is beneficial with degraded DNA. Altogether, MPS has the potential to increase the weights of evidence for true contributors to (complex) DNA profiles. In this study, likelihood ratio (LR) calculations were performed using STR profiles obtained with two different MPS systems and analysed using different settings: 1) MPS PowerSeq™ Auto System profiles analysed using FDSTools equipped with optimized settings such as noise correction, 2) ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit profiles analysed using the default settings in the Universal Analysis Software (UAS), and 3) ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit profiles analysed using FDSTools empirically adapted to cope with one-directional reads and provisional, basic settings. The LR calculations used genotyping data for two- to four-person mixtures varying for mixture proportion, level of drop-out and allele sharing and were generated with the continuous model EuroForMix. The LR results for the over 2000 sets of propositions were affected by the variation for the number of markers and analysis settings used in the three approaches. Nevertheless, trends for true and non-contributors, effects of replicates, assigned number of contributors, and model validation results were comparable for the three MPS approaches and alike the trends known for CE data. Based on this analogy, we regard the probabilistic interpretation of MPS STR data fit for forensic DNA casework. In addition, guidelines were derived on when to apply LR calculations to MPS autosomal STR data and report the corresponding results.

STRmix™ collaborative exercise on DNA mixture interpretation

An intra and inter-laboratory study using the probabilistic genotyping (PG) software STRmix™ is reported. Two complex mixtures from the PROVEDIt set, analysed on an Applied Biosystems™ 3500 Series Genetic Analyzer, were selected. 174 participants responded. For Sample 1 (low template, in the order of 200 rfu for major contributors) five participants described the comparison as inconclusive with respect to the POI or excluded him. Where LRs were assigned, the point estimates ranging from 2 × 10⁴ to 8 × 10⁶. For Sample 2 (in the order of 2000 rfu for major contributors), LRs ranged from 2 × 10²⁸ to 2 × 10²⁹. Where LRs were calculated, the differences between participants can be attributed to (from largest to smallest impact): This study demonstrates a high level of repeatability and reproducibility among the participants. For those results that differed from the mode, the differences in LR were almost always minor or conservative.

Probabilistic genotyping software: An overview

The interpretation of mixed profiles from DNA evidentiary material is one of the more challenging duties of the forensic scientist. Traditionally, analysts have used a "binary" approach to interpretation where inferred genotypes are either included or excluded from the mixture using a stochastic threshold and other biological parameters such as heterozygote balance, mixture ratio, and stutter ratios. As the sensitivity of STR multiplexes and capillary electrophoresis instrumentation improved over the past 25 years, coupled with the change in the type of evidence being submitted for analysis (from high quality and quantity (often single-source) stains to low quality and quantity (often mixed) "touch" samples), the complexity of DNA profile interpretation has equally increased. This review provides a historical perspective on the movement from binary methods of interpretation to probabilistic methods of interpretation. We describe the two approaches to probabilistic genotyping (semi-continuous and fully continuous) and address issues such as validation and court acceptance. Areas of future needs for probabilistic software are discussed.

The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity

Forensic DNA interpretation is transitioning from manual interpretation based usually on binary decision-making toward computer-based systems that model the probability of the profile given different explanations for it, termed probabilistic genotyping (PG). Decision-making by laboratories to implement probability-based interpretation should be based on scientific principles for validity and information that supports its utility, such as criteria to support admissibility. The principles behind STRmix™ are outlined in this study and include standard mathematics and modeling of peak heights and variability in those heights. All PG methods generate a likelihood ratio (LR) and require the formulation of propositions. Principles underpinning formulations of propositions include the identification of reasonably assumed contributors. Substantial data have been produced that support precision, error rate, and reliability of PG, and in particular, STRmix™. A current issue is access to the code and quality processes used while coding. There are substantial data that describe the performance, strengths, and limitations of STRmix™, one of the available PG software.