Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mcnelson.phd
    Senior Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 162

    #1

    Bad MiSeq Reagent Kits

    Hey everyone,

    Not sure how many people have heard about this, but apparently Illumina had a bad set of MiSeq reagent kits get shipped to customers. I found this out from talking with my FAS after we had a run fail this past weekend and he asked for the lot numbers for all Box 1's (the reagent cartridge) that we had. Turns out that the failed run, and 4 out of our 5 remaining 500 cycle kits have lot numbers that Illumina has identified as possibly having issues.

    My FAS told me Illumina quality assurance was supposed to notify affected users yesterday, but I never received any emails about this so anyone thinking of doing a 500 cycle soon might want to hold off or at least check with their FAS to see if their kit is unaffected by the issue.

    I'm not going to post lot numbers for the kits we had that were affected, but I will say that they were all purchased/received around the end of last year through the first two weeks of this year. 50 and 300 cycle kits, as far as I know, don't appear to be affected as my FAS didn't mention them (there was an implication that all 300 cycle kits are OK).

    Hopefully this gets sorted out soon, or else Illumina could have a pretty bad PR problem on its hands.
  • microgirl123
    Senior Member
    • Jun 2012
    • 199

    #2
    We received notification late yesterday afternoon. We did have one in our freezer. I'm wondering if there's a way to figure out what the lot number was on past runs.

    Comment

    • mcnelson.phd
      Senior Member
      • Jul 2011
      • 162

      #3
      Originally posted by microgirl123 View Post
      We received notification late yesterday afternoon. We did have one in our freezer. I'm wondering if there's a way to figure out what the lot number was on past runs.
      As far as past runs go, Illumina should be able to figure that out based on the reagent barcode.

      As for the email, care to share any information about it? My FAS said we should have received one yesterday but I certainly never got it so now we're stuck with 4 kits that aren't useable and no idea when we'll be getting replacements.

      Comment

      • microgirl123
        Senior Member
        • Jun 2012
        • 199

        #4
        Without sharing lot numbers, the email states that it's for 500 cycle kits received after November 27, 2012. They are working to resolve the issue and plan to be shipping again by Feb 4, 2013. Quoting from the letter, "The affected 500 cycle kits may have a shorter than expected shelf life and use of these kits can produce higher than expected pre-phasing values, and decreased data quality. "

        To add to this, the letter also states "You are receiving this notice because our records indicate you received the affected product." Possibly, if Illumina doesn't have you listed as receiving one of these kits, you won't receive the notice?

        Comment

        • TonyBrooks
          Senior Member
          • Jun 2009
          • 303

          #5
          I'd done three runs that looked poor. Initially I attributed it to overclustering, then we had a run with 881k/mm2 and the Q-scores seem to fall off a cliff after 200 cycles.
          Our phasing/prephasing % estimates actually look OK, though.

          Comment

          • microgirl123
            Senior Member
            • Jun 2012
            • 199

            #6
            And. . . I've just received notice that our replacement reagent cartridge should arrive by February 8.

            Comment

            • mcnelson.phd
              Senior Member
              • Jul 2011
              • 162

              #7
              Well, I never got an email from Illumina QA, but our FAS has been pretty good at providing us with all of the information and getting us our replacements.

              Apparently it was a contaminant in the incorporation mix that could lead to poor run quality, which certainly helps explain some previous runs. Just finished running a "good" kit this morning and the data quality is much improved, although I don't know how much of that is the kit versus the new MCS software that was recently put out as well.

              Hopefully Illumina steps up the sampling for the QA checks so they don't have these issues in the future.

              Comment

              • Bucky
                Member
                • Feb 2010
                • 18

                #8
                Originally posted by TonyBrooks View Post
                I'd done three runs that looked poor. Initially I attributed it to overclustering, then we had a run with 881k/mm2 and the Q-scores seem to fall off a cliff after 200 cycles.
                Our phasing/prephasing % estimates actually look OK, though.
                Same with our runs! We had several kits from "bad" lots in our freezers and the ones we used had really poor quality, especially towards the end of the run (as exemplified by a "tower" at q10

                Comment

                • gwilkie
                  Member
                  • Dec 2011
                  • 27

                  #9
                  Yep we had several 500 cycle runs all clustering between 800 - 950k/mm2 that failed. The quality degraded after about 170 cycles, reverse reads were only 60% >Q30. Some of the thumbnails were very blurry but phasing/prephasing wasn't terribly bad IIRC.

                  I still have six kits from the dodgy batch in the freezer! Currently waiting on PhiX results from a new 500 cycle kit to make sure everything really is OK with the instrument, as it also had some parts replaced recently. Illumina were starting to scratch their heads over what was wrong with our MiSeq then came up with this... hope its the answer.

                  The MiSeq is a great machine, when it works

                  Comment

                  • mcnelson.phd
                    Senior Member
                    • Jul 2011
                    • 162

                    #10
                    Originally posted by gwilkie View Post
                    The MiSeq is a great machine, when it works
                    Truer statements have rarely been said on this forum...

                    Comment

                    • matth431
                      Member
                      • Jan 2012
                      • 36

                      #11
                      We had one of the affected kits - no advisory (noticed the bulletin on MyIllumina when going to order replacement). Didn't even get as far as sequencing - read 1 focus failed and the MiSeq threw up an orange light. Unfortunately this was our first test of a v2 kit since we had the upgrade so we were initially uncertain if it was something we'd done wrong (loading, etc).

                      Comment

                      • MLog
                        Member
                        • Jan 2010
                        • 36

                        #12
                        Originally posted by matth431 View Post
                        We had one of the affected kits - no advisory (noticed the bulletin on MyIllumina when going to order replacement). Didn't even get as far as sequencing - read 1 focus failed and the MiSeq threw up an orange light. Unfortunately this was our first test of a v2 kit since we had the upgrade so we were initially uncertain if it was something we'd done wrong (loading, etc).
                        We tried to use the kit from the bad lot and got almost the same result today... The sequencing seemed to progress well until 174 cycle, but after this MCS reported an error on autofocusing ("best focus is too near the edge of range") and stopped the run.

                        Comment

                        • Vinz
                          Member
                          • Dec 2010
                          • 80

                          #13
                          It is hard to say if all lots of the bad lots are the same. Maybe some are a lot worse than others. All I can say is that we had quite a couple of different lots from the bad batch and the effects were mild. I would bet that your focusing issues are not related to the bad lot. These are most likely instrument issues (matth might be handling).

                          Comment

                          • tymek666
                            Junior Member
                            • May 2011
                            • 7

                            #14
                            The same here, two reagent kits 500v2 shipped in December went to trash. kits shipped in January semms to be fine.

                            Comment

                            Latest Articles

                            Collapse

                            • SEQadmin2
                              Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
                              by SEQadmin2



                              CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

                              Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
                              ...
                              07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
                            • SEQadmin2
                              Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                              by SEQadmin2


                              Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                              The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                              ...
                              07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

                            ad_right_rmr

                            Collapse

                            News

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 12:22 PM
                            0 responses
                            12 views
                            0 reactions
                            Last Post SEQadmin2  
                            Started by SEQadmin2, 08-11-2026, 10:35 AM
                            0 responses
                            14 views
                            0 reactions
                            Last Post SEQadmin2  
                            Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
                            0 responses
                            31 views
                            0 reactions
                            Last Post SEQadmin2  
                            Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
                            0 responses
                            49 views
                            0 reactions
                            Last Post SEQadmin2  
                            Working...