Implementation of a dyadic nomenclature for monogenic diseases.

A core task when establishing the strength of evidence for a gene's role in a monogenic disorder is determining the appropriate disease entity to curate. Establishing this concept determines which evidence can be applied and quantified toward the final gene-disease validity, variant pathogenicity, or actionability classification. Genes with implications in more than one phenotype can necessitate a process of lumping and splitting, disease reorganization, and updates to disease nomenclature. Reappraisal of the names that are used as labels for disease entities is therefore a necessary and perpetual process. The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen), in collaboration with representatives from Monarch Disease Ontology (Mondo) and Online Inheritance in Man (OMIM), formed the Disease Naming Advisory Committee (DNAC) to develop guidance for groups faced with the need to establish the "curated disease entity" for gene-phenotype validity and variant pathogenicity and to update disease names for clinical use when necessary. The objective of this group was to harmonize guidance for disease naming across these nosologic entities and among ClinGen curation groups in collaboration with other disease-related professional groups. Here, we present the initial guidance developed by the DNAC with representative examples provided by the ClinGen expert panels and working groups that warranted nomenclature updates. We also discuss the broader implications of these efforts and their benefits for harmonization of gene-disease validity curation. Overall, this work sheds light on current inconsistencies and/or discrepancies and is designed to engage the broader community on how ClinGen defines monogenic disorders using a consistent approach for disease naming.

Group-based medical mistrust in genomic medicine: Associations with patient and provider perceptions of a specialty clinical encounter.

PURPOSE: Investigating associations between group-based medical mistrust (GBMM) and perceptions of patient-provider encounters can identify one mechanism through which GBMM may influence health outcomes and serve as a barrier to equitable health care. This study investigated associations between GBMM reported by caregivers of children with a possible genetic condition and caregivers' and providers' perceptions of a specialty care appointment discussing diagnostic plans. METHODS: Caregivers (N = 177) completed the GBMM scale and other measures before their child's initial specialty clinic visit. After the visit, caregivers reported their perceptions of the visit, including patient centeredness and satisfaction with care. Providers (N = 6) reported their perceptions of patient engagement. RESULTS: Multivariable linear regression showed that higher caregiver GBMM was associated with caregivers' lower satisfaction with care (P < .01) and more negative perceptions of every domain of patient centeredness (P = .001-.04). Multilevel modeling showed that higher caregiver GBMM was associated with more negative provider perceptions of caregivers' preparedness to participate in care (P = .03), likely treatment compliance (P = .03), and relevance of questions asked during visit (P = .04). CONCLUSION: Our findings extend evidence for detrimental effects of GBMM on patient satisfaction to caregivers of pediatric patients and offer new evidence for associations with health care providers' perceptions of caregivers' engagement with care.

Toward robust clinical genome interpretation: Developing a consistent terminology to characterize Mendelian disease-gene relationships-allelic requirement, inheritance modes, and disease mechanisms.

PURPOSE: The terminology used for gene-disease curation and variant annotation to describe inheritance, allelic requirement, and both sequence and functional consequences of a variant is currently not standardized. There is considerable discrepancy in the literature and across clinical variant reporting in the derivation and application of terms. Here, we standardize the terminology for the characterization of disease-gene relationships to facilitate harmonized global curation and to support variant classification within the ACMG/AMP framework. METHODS: Terminology for inheritance, allelic requirement, and both structural and functional consequences of a variant used by Gene Curation Coalition members and partner organizations was collated and reviewed. Harmonized terminology with definitions and use examples was created, reviewed, and validated. RESULTS: We present a standardized terminology to describe gene-disease relationships, and to support variant annotation. We demonstrate application of the terminology for classification of variation in the ACMG SF 2.0 genes recommended for reporting of secondary findings. Consensus terms were agreed and formalized in both Sequence Ontology (SO) and Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) ontologies. Gene Curation Coalition member groups intend to use or map to these terms in their respective resources. CONCLUSION: The terminology standardization presented here will improve harmonization, facilitate the pooling of curation datasets across international curation efforts and, in turn, improve consistency in variant classification and genetic test interpretation.

A systematic framework for selecting gene-condition pairs for inclusion in newborn sequencing panels: Early Check implementation.

PURPOSE: Research is underway worldwide to investigate the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of sequencing-based newborn screening. Different methods have been used to select gene-condition pairs for screening, leading to highly inconsistent gene lists across studies. METHODS: Early Check developed and utilized actionability-based frameworks for evaluating gene-condition pairs for inclusion in newborn panels (Panel 1 - high actionability, Panel 2 - possible actionability). A previously developed framework, the Age-based Semi Quantitative Metric (ASQM), was adapted. Increasing ASQM scores, with a maximum of 15, suggest greater actionability. Wilcoxon tests were performed to compare Panel 1 gene-condition pairs on the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) to non-RUSP pairs. RESULTS: In our first round of assessment, Early Check identified 178 gene-condition pairs for inclusion in Panel 1 and 29 for Panel 2. Median ASQM scores of RUSP conditions on Panel 1 was 12 (range 4 to 15) and non-RUSP was 13 (range 9 to 15). Median scores for Panel 2 was 10 (range 6 to 14). CONCLUSION: The Early Check frameworks provide a transparent, semiquantitative, and reproducible methodology for selecting gene-condition pairs for NBS sequencing pilot studies that may inform future integration of genomic sequencing into population-level NBS. Collaborative efforts among newborn sequencing studies to establish shared criteria is needed to enhance cross-study comparisons.

Advancing Genetic Testing in Kidney Diseases: Report From a National Kidney Foundation Working Group.

About 37 million people in the United States have chronic kidney disease, a disease that encompasses multiple causes. About 10% or more of kidney diseases in adults and as many as 70% of selected chronic kidney diseases in children are expected to be explained by genetic causes. Despite the advances in genetic testing and an increasing understanding of the genetic bases of certain kidney diseases, genetic testing in nephrology lags behind other medical fields. More understanding of the benefits and logistics of genetic testing is needed to advance the implementation of genetic testing in chronic kidney diseases. Accordingly, the National Kidney Foundation convened a Working Group of experts with diverse expertise in genetics, nephrology, and allied fields to develop recommendations for genetic testing for monogenic disorders and to identify genetic risk factors for oligogenic and polygenic causes of kidney diseases. Algorithms for clinical decision making on genetic testing and a road map for advancing genetic testing in kidney diseases were generated. An important aspect of this initiative was the use of a modified Delphi process to reach group consensus on the recommendations. The recommendations and resources described herein provide support to nephrologists and allied health professionals to advance the use of genetic testing for diagnosis and screening of kidney diseases.

Genomic Sequencing for Newborn Screening: Results of the NC NEXUS Project.

Newborn screening (NBS) was established as a public health program in the 1960s and is crucial for facilitating detection of certain medical conditions in which early intervention can prevent serious, life-threatening health problems. Genomic sequencing can potentially expand the screening for rare hereditary disorders, but many questions surround its possible use for this purpose. We examined the use of exome sequencing (ES) for NBS in the North Carolina Newborn Exome Sequencing for Universal Screening (NC NEXUS) project, comparing the yield from ES used in a screening versus a diagnostic context. We enrolled healthy newborns and children with metabolic diseases or hearing loss (106 participants total). ES confirmed the participant's underlying diagnosis in 15 out of 17 (88%) children with metabolic disorders and in 5 out of 28 (∼18%) children with hearing loss. We discovered actionable findings in four participants that would not have been detected by standard NBS. A subset of parents was eligible to receive additional information for their child about childhood-onset conditions with low or no clinical actionability, clinically actionable adult-onset conditions, and carrier status for autosomal-recessive conditions. We found pathogenic variants associated with hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer in two children, a likely pathogenic variant in the gene associated with Lowe syndrome in one child, and an average of 1.8 reportable variants per child for carrier results. These results highlight the benefits and limitations of using genomic sequencing for NBS and the challenges of using such technology in future precision medicine approaches.

The Burden of COVID-19 on Caregivers of Children with Suspected Genetic Conditions: A Therapeutic Odyssey.

AIMS: Children with disabilities and rare or undiagnosed conditions and their families have faced numerous hardships of living during the COVID-19 pandemic. For those with undiagnosed conditions, the diagnostic odyssey can be long, expensive, and marked by uncertainty. We, therefore, sought to understand whether and how COVID-19 impacted the trajectory of children's care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 25 caregivers who, prior to the pandemic, were on a diagnostic odyssey for their children. RESULTS: Most caregivers did not report any interruptions to their child's diagnostic odyssey. The greatest impact was access to therapy services, including the suspension or loss of their child's in-person therapeutic care and difficulties with virtual therapies. This therapy gap caused caregivers to fear that their children were not making progress. CONCLUSION: Although much has been written about the challenges of diagnostic odysseys for children and their families, this study illustrates the importance of expanding the focus of these studies to include therapeutic odysseys. Because therapeutic odysseys continue regardless of whether diagnoses are made, future research should investigate how to support caregivers through children's therapies within and outside of the COVID-19 context.

Newborn screening for neurodevelopmental diseases: Are we there yet?

In the US, newborn screening (NBS) is a unique health program that supports health equity and screens virtually every baby after birth, and has brought timely treatments to babies since the 1960's. With the decreasing cost of sequencing and the improving methods to interpret genetic data, there is an opportunity to add DNA sequencing as a screening method to facilitate the identification of babies with treatable conditions that cannot be identified in any other scalable way, including highly penetrant genetic neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). However, the lack of effective dietary or drug-based treatments has made it nearly impossible to consider NDDs in the current NBS framework, yet it is anticipated that any treatment will be maximally effective if started early. Hence there is a critical need for large scale pilot studies to assess if and how NDDs can be effectively screened at birth, if parents desire that information, and what impact early diagnosis may have. Here we attempt to provide an overview of the recent advances in NDD treatments, explore the possible framework of setting up a pilot study to genetically screen for NDDs, highlight key technical, practical, and ethical considerations and challenges, and examine the policy and health system implications.

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders.

PURPOSE: Understanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist. RESULTS: Across the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis. CONCLUSION: We describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.

Testing and extending strategies for identifying genetic disease-related encounters in pediatric patients.

PURPOSE: To better understand health care utilization and develop decision support tools, methods for identifying patients with suspected genetic diseases (GDs) are needed. Previous studies had identified inpatient-relevant International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes that were possibly, probably, or definitely indicative of GDs. We assessed whether these codes identified GD-related inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department encounters among pediatric patients with suspected GDs from a previous study (the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-Generation Exome Sequencing [NCGENES] study). METHODS: Using the electronic medical records of 140 pediatric patients from the NCGENES study, we characterized the presence of ICD codes representing possible, probable, or definite GD-related diagnoses across encounter types. In addition, we examined codes from encounters for which initially no GD-related codes had been found and determined whether these codes were indicative of a GD. RESULTS: Among NCGENES patients with visits between 2014 and 2017, 92% of inpatient, 75% of emergency department, and 63% of outpatient encounters included ≥1 GD-related code. Encounters with highly specific (ie, definite) GD codes had fewer low-specificity GD codes than encounters with only low-specificity GD codes. We identified an additional 32 ICD-9 and 56 ICD-10 codes possibly indicative of a GD. CONCLUSION: Code-based strategies can be refined to assess health care utilization among pediatric patients and may contribute to a systematic approach to identify patients with suspected GDs.

US private payers' perspectives on insurance coverage for genome sequencing versus exome sequencing: A study by the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium (CSER).

PURPOSE: There is limited payer coverage for genome sequencing (GS) relative to exome sequencing (ES) in the U.S. Our objective was to assess payers' considerations for coverage of GS versus coverage of ES and requirements payers have for coverage of GS. The study was conducted by the NIH-funded Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium (CSER). METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives of private payer organizations (payers, N = 12) on considerations and evidentiary and other needs for coverage of GS and ES. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: We described four categories of findings and solutions: demonstrated merits of GS versus ES, enhanced methods for evidence generation, consistent laboratory processes/sequencing methods, and enhanced implementation/care delivery. Payers see advantages to GS vs. ES and are open to broader GS coverage but need more proof of these advantages to consider them in coverage decision-making. Next steps include establishing evidence of benefits in specific clinical scenarios, developing quality standards, ensuring transparency of laboratory methods, developing clinical centers of excellence, and incorporating the role of genetic professionals. CONCLUSION: By comparing coverage considerations for GS and ES, we identified a path forward for coverage of GS. Future research should explicitly address payers' conditions for coverage.

The Gene Curation Coalition: A global effort to harmonize gene-disease evidence resources.

PURPOSE: Several groups and resources provide information that pertains to the validity of gene-disease relationships used in genomic medicine and research; however, universal standards and terminologies to define the evidence base for the role of a gene in disease and a single harmonized resource were lacking. To tackle this issue, the Gene Curation Coalition (GenCC) was formed. METHODS: The GenCC drafted harmonized definitions for differing levels of gene-disease validity on the basis of existing resources, and performed a modified Delphi survey with 3 rounds to narrow the list of terms. The GenCC also developed a unified database to display curated gene-disease validity assertions from its members. RESULTS: On the basis of 241 survey responses from the genetics community, a consensus term set was chosen for grading gene-disease validity and database submissions. As of December 2021, the database contained 15,241 gene-disease assertions on 4569 unique genes from 12 submitters. When comparing submissions to the database from distinct sources, conflicts in assertions of gene-disease validity ranged from 5.3% to 13.4%. CONCLUSION: Terminology standardization, sharing of gene-disease validity classifications, and resolution of curation conflicts will facilitate collaborations across international curation efforts and in turn, improve consistency in genetic testing and variant interpretation.

Quality of care metrics for patients with inborn errors of metabolism.

Despite recent calls to action and a heavy emphasis on timeliness of care in guidelines for common inborn errors of metabolism, there is a dearth of specific measurable quality metrics for these conditions and little to no electronic decision support for their management. We have developed a novel set of process-oriented metrics based on the aforementioned guidelines that can be calculated from data already contained in most major EHRs, which we believe are responsive to the needs of the metabolism community.

Noninvasive prenatal exome sequencing diagnostic utility limited by sequencing depth and fetal fraction.

OBJECTIVE: Sequencing cell-free DNA now allows detection of large chromosomal abnormalities and dominant Mendelian disorders in the prenatal period. Improving upon these methods would allow newborn screening programs to begin with prenatal genetics, ultimately improving the management of rare genetic disorders. METHODS: As a pilot study, we performed exome sequencing on the cell-free DNA from three mothers with singleton pregnancies to assess the viability of broad sequencing modalities in a noninvasive prenatal setting. RESULTS: We found poor resolution of maternal and fetal genotypes due to both sampling and technical issues. CONCLUSION: We find broad sequencing modalities inefficient for noninvasive prenatal applications. Alternatively, we suggest a more targeted path forward for noninvasive prenatal genotyping.

Pre-capture multiplexing provides additional power to detect copy number variation in exome sequencing.

BACKGROUND: As exome sequencing (ES) integrates into clinical practice, we should make every effort to utilize all information generated. Copy-number variation can lead to Mendelian disorders, but small copy-number variants (CNVs) often get overlooked or obscured by under-powered data collection. Many groups have developed methodology for detecting CNVs from ES, but existing methods often perform poorly for small CNVs and rely on large numbers of samples not always available to clinical laboratories. Furthermore, methods often rely on Bayesian approaches requiring user-defined priors in the setting of insufficient prior knowledge. This report first demonstrates the benefit of multiplexed exome capture (pooling samples prior to capture), then presents a novel detection algorithm, mcCNV ("multiplexed capture CNV"), built around multiplexed capture. RESULTS: We demonstrate: (1) multiplexed capture reduces inter-sample variance; (2) our mcCNV method, a novel depth-based algorithm for detecting CNVs from multiplexed capture ES data, improves the detection of small CNVs. We contrast our novel approach, agnostic to prior information, with the the commonly-used ExomeDepth. In a simulation study mcCNV demonstrated a favorable false discovery rate (FDR). When compared to calls made from matched genome sequencing, we find the mcCNV algorithm performs comparably to ExomeDepth. CONCLUSION: Implementing multiplexed capture increases power to detect single-exon CNVs. The novel mcCNV algorithm may provide a more favorable FDR than ExomeDepth. The greatest benefits of our approach derive from (1) not requiring a database of reference samples and (2) not requiring prior information about the prevalance or size of variants.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ameliorate MEGF10 myopathy.

MEGF10 myopathy is a rare inherited muscle disease that is named after the causative gene, MEGF10. The classic phenotype, early onset myopathy, areflexia, respiratory distress and dysphagia, is severe and immediately life-threatening. There are no disease-modifying therapies. We performed a small molecule screen and follow-up studies to seek a novel therapy. A primary in vitro drug screen assessed cellular proliferation patterns in Megf10-deficient myoblasts. Secondary evaluations were performed on primary screen hits using myoblasts derived from Megf10-/- mice, induced pluripotent stem cell-derived myoblasts from MEGF10 myopathy patients, mutant Drosophila that are deficient in the homologue of MEGF10 (Drpr) and megf10 mutant zebrafish. The screen yielded two promising candidates that are both selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), sertraline and escitalopram. In depth follow-up analyses demonstrated that sertraline was highly effective in alleviating abnormalities across multiple models of the disease including mouse myoblast, human myoblast, Drosophila and zebrafish models. Sertraline also restored deficiencies of Notch1 in disease models. We conclude that SSRIs show promise as potential therapeutic compounds for MEGF10 myopathy, especially sertraline. The mechanism of action may involve the Notch pathway.

The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium: Integrating Genomic Sequencing in Diverse and Medically Underserved Populations.

The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, now in its second funding cycle, is investigating the effectiveness of integrating genomic (exome or genome) sequencing into the clinical care of diverse and medically underserved individuals in a variety of healthcare settings and disease states. The consortium comprises a coordinating center, six funded extramural clinical projects, and an ongoing National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project. Collectively, these projects aim to enroll and sequence over 6,100 participants in four years. At least 60% of participants will be of non-European ancestry or from underserved settings, with the goal of diversifying the populations that are providing an evidence base for genomic medicine. Five of the six clinical projects are enrolling pediatric patients with various phenotypes. One of these five projects is also enrolling couples whose fetus has a structural anomaly, and the sixth project is enrolling adults at risk for hereditary cancer. The ongoing NHGRI intramural project has enrolled primarily healthy adults. Goals of the consortium include assessing the clinical utility of genomic sequencing, exploring medical follow up and cascade testing of relatives, and evaluating patient-provider-laboratory level interactions that influence the use of this technology. The findings from the CSER consortium will offer patients, healthcare systems, and policymakers a clearer understanding of the opportunities and challenges of providing genomic medicine in diverse populations and settings, and contribute evidence toward developing best practices for the delivery of clinically useful and cost-effective genomic sequencing in diverse healthcare settings.

Evaluating the Clinical Validity of Gene-Disease Associations: An Evidence-Based Framework Developed by the Clinical Genome Resource.

With advances in genomic sequencing technology, the number of reported gene-disease relationships has rapidly expanded. However, the evidence supporting these claims varies widely, confounding accurate evaluation of genomic variation in a clinical setting. Despite the critical need to differentiate clinically valid relationships from less well-substantiated relationships, standard guidelines for such evaluation do not currently exist. The NIH-funded Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) has developed a framework to define and evaluate the clinical validity of gene-disease pairs across a variety of Mendelian disorders. In this manuscript we describe a proposed framework to evaluate relevant genetic and experimental evidence supporting or contradicting a gene-disease relationship and the subsequent validation of this framework using a set of representative gene-disease pairs. The framework provides a semiquantitative measurement for the strength of evidence of a gene-disease relationship that correlates to a qualitative classification: "Definitive," "Strong," "Moderate," "Limited," "No Reported Evidence," or "Conflicting Evidence." Within the ClinGen structure, classifications derived with this framework are reviewed and confirmed or adjusted based on clinical expertise of appropriate disease experts. Detailed guidance for utilizing this framework and access to the curation interface is available on our website. This evidence-based, systematic method to assess the strength of gene-disease relationships will facilitate more knowledgeable utilization of genomic variants in clinical and research settings.

Parents' perceptions of personal utility of exome sequencing results.

PURPOSE: Clinical genome or exome sequencing (GS/ES) provides a diagnosis for many individuals with suspected genetic disorders, but also yields negative or uncertain results for the majority. This study examines how parents of a child with an undiagnosed condition attribute personal utility to all types of ES results. METHODS: Return of 31 exome sequencing results was observed during clinic sessions, followed by semistructured interviews with parents one month later. Observations and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data display matrices were used for content analysis and systematic comparisons of parents' perceptions of utility. RESULTS: ES results could not provide all the answers to parents' questions, especially in cases of clinically uninformative results, but parents nonetheless attributed utility to the knowledge gained. Parents across all results categories used the genomic information to rule out possible causes, end or postpone the diagnostic odyssey, and shift focus to treatment and management of symptoms. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that parents value even uninformative ES results while expressing hope for future discoveries. As pediatric genetics moves toward GS/ES as a first-tier test, how parents perceive the personal utility of negative or uncertain results is an important topic for genetic counseling and further research.

Genomic knowledge in the context of diagnostic exome sequencing: changes over time, persistent subgroup differences, and associations with psychological sequencing outcomes.

PURPOSE: People undergoing diagnostic genome-scale sequencing are expected to have better psychological outcomes when they can incorporate and act on accurate, relevant knowledge that supports informed decision making. METHODS: This longitudinal study used data from the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by NextGen Exome Sequencing Study (NCGENES) of diagnostic exome sequencing to evaluate associations between factual genomic knowledge (measured with the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale at three assessments from baseline to after return of results) and sequencing outcomes that reflected participants' perceived understanding of the study and sequencing, regret for joining the study, and responses to learning sequencing results. It also investigated differences in genomic knowledge associated with subgroups differing in race/ethnicity, income, education, health literacy, English proficiency, and prior genetic testing. RESULTS: Multivariate models revealed higher genomic knowledge at baseline for non-Hispanic Whites and those with higher income, education, and health literacy (p values < 0.001). These subgroup differences persisted across study assessments despite a general increase in knowledge among all groups. Greater baseline genomic knowledge was associated with lower test-related distress (p = 0.047) and greater perceived understanding of diagnostic genomic sequencing (p values 0.04 to <0.001). CONCLUSION: Findings extend understanding of the role of genomic knowledge in psychological outcomes of diagnostic exome sequencing, providing guidance for additional research and interventions.