Myosin Mutations and Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Results of Whole Exome Sequencing.

OBJECTIVE: Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) affects 66,000 patients per year in the United States. Genetic mutations have been associated with progressive hearing loss; however, genetic mutations associated with ISSNHL have not been identified. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of adults older than 18 years presenting with ISSNHL at a tertiary academic medical center. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was conducted using Genome Analysis Toolkit best practices. An automated diagnostic screen employing a variety of models for pathogenicity was conducted across all genes with no specific targets. Candidate pathogenic variants were reviewed by a team of geneticists and clinicians. Variants were crossed-referenced with 92 known hearing loss associated genes. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients with SSNHL were screened using WES. The average age of patients was 53 ± 17.1 years, and most patients were White (62%) and men (55%). The mean pure tone average was 64.8 ± 31.3 dB for the affected ear. Using a 0.1% allele frequency screen, 12 (41%) cases had a mutation in any of the nine selected myosin genes. When we restrict to singletons (allele frequency = 0%), 21% (n = 6) of cases have qualifying variants, whereas only 3.8% (n = 481) of 12,577 healthy controls carry qualifying variants (p < 0.01). Most mutations (80%) were missense mutations. Of the novel mutations, one was a frameshift mutation, and two were a stop-gained function. Three were missense mutations. CONCLUSION: Myosin mutations may be associated with ISSNHL. However, larger population screening is needed to confirm the association of myosin mutation with ISSNHL and steroid responsiveness.

Diagnostic Utility of Exome Sequencing for Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Exome sequencing is emerging as a first-line diagnostic method in some clinical disciplines, but its usefulness has yet to be examined for most constitutional disorders in adults, including chronic kidney disease, which affects more than 1 in 10 persons globally. METHODS: We conducted exome sequencing and diagnostic analysis in two cohorts totaling 3315 patients with chronic kidney disease. We assessed the diagnostic yield and, among the patients for whom detailed clinical data were available, the clinical implications of diagnostic and other medically relevant findings. RESULTS: In all, 3037 patients (91.6%) were over 21 years of age, and 1179 (35.6%) were of self-identified non-European ancestry. We detected diagnostic variants in 307 of the 3315 patients (9.3%), encompassing 66 different monogenic disorders. Of the disorders detected, 39 (59%) were found in only a single patient. Diagnostic variants were detected across all clinically defined categories, including congenital or cystic renal disease (127 of 531 patients [23.9%]) and nephropathy of unknown origin (48 of 281 patients [17.1%]). Of the 2187 patients assessed, 34 (1.6%) had genetic findings for medically actionable disorders that, although unrelated to their nephropathy, would also lead to subspecialty referral and inform renal management. CONCLUSIONS: Exome sequencing in a combined cohort of more than 3000 patients with chronic kidney disease yielded a genetic diagnosis in just under 10% of cases. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others.).

Refining the phenotype associated with GNB1 mutations: Clinical data on 18 newly identified patients and review of the literature.

De novo germline mutations in GNB1 have been associated with a neurodevelopmental phenotype. To date, 28 patients with variants classified as pathogenic have been reported. We add 18 patients with de novo mutations to this cohort, including a patient with mosaicism for a GNB1 mutation who presented with a milder phenotype. Consistent with previous reports, developmental delay in these patients was moderate to severe, and more than half of the patients were non-ambulatory and nonverbal. The most observed substitution affects the p.Ile80 residue encoded in exon 6, with 28% of patients carrying a variant at this residue. Dystonia and growth delay were observed more frequently in patients carrying variants in this residue, suggesting a potential genotype-phenotype correlation. In the new cohort of 18 patients, 50% of males had genitourinary anomalies and 61% of patients had gastrointestinal anomalies, suggesting a possible association of these findings with variants in GNB1. In addition, cutaneous mastocytosis, reported once before in a patient with a GNB1 variant, was observed in three additional patients, providing further evidence for an association to GNB1. We will review clinical and molecular data of these new cases and all previously reported cases to further define the phenotype and establish possible genotype-phenotype correlations.

Clinical Genomic Profiling of a Diverse Array of Oncology Specimens at a Large Academic Cancer Center: Identification of Targetable Variants and Experience with Reimbursement.

Large cancer panels are being increasingly used in the practice of precision medicine to generate genomic profiles of tumors with the goal of identifying targetable variants and guiding eligibility for clinical trials. To facilitate identification of mutations in a broad range of solid and hematological malignancies, a 467-gene oncology panel (Columbia Combined Cancer Panel) was developed in collaboration with pathologists and oncologists and is currently available and in use for clinical diagnostics. Herein, we share our experience with this testing in an academic medical center. Of 255 submitted specimens, which encompassed a diverse range of tumor types, we were able to successfully sequence 92%. The Columbia Combined Cancer Panel assay led to the detection of a targetable variant in 48.7% of cases. However, although we show good clinical performance and diagnostic yield, third-party reimbursement has been poor. Reimbursement from government and third-party payers using the 81455 Current Procedural Terminology code was at 19.4% of billed costs, and 55% of cases were rejected on first submission. Likely contributing factors to this low level of reimbursement are the delays in valuation of the 81455 Current Procedural Terminology code and in establishing national or local coverage determinations. In the absence of additional demonstrations of clinical utility and improved patient outcomes, we expect the reimbursement environment will continue to limit the availability of this testing more broadly.