Accelerated genome sequencing with controlled costs for infants in intensive care units: a feasibility study in a French hospital network.

Obtaining a rapid etiological diagnosis for infants with early-onset rare diseases remains a major challenge. These diseases often have a severe presentation and unknown prognosis, and the genetic causes are very heterogeneous. In a French hospital network, we assessed the feasibility of performing accelerated trio-genome sequencing (GS) with limited additional costs by integrating urgent requests into the routine workflow. In addition to evaluating our capacity for such an approach, this prospective multicentre pilot study was designed to identify pitfalls encountered during its implementation. Over 14 months, we included newborns and infants hospitalized in neonatal or paediatric intensive care units with probable genetic disease and in urgent need for etiological diagnosis to guide medical care. The duration of each step and the pitfalls were recorded. We analysed any deviation from the planned schedule and identified obstacles. Trio-GS was performed for 37 individuals, leading to a molecular diagnosis in 18/37 (49%), and 21/37 (57%) after reanalysis. Corrective measures and protocol adaptations resulted in a median duration of 42 days from blood sampling to report. Accelerated trio-GS is undeniably valuable for individuals in an urgent care context. Such a circuit should coexist with a rapid or ultra-rapid circuit, which, although more expensive, can be used in particularly urgent cases. The drop in GS costs should result in its generalized use for diagnostic purposes and lead to a reduction of the costs of rapid GS.

Assessment of the prognostic role of a 94-single nucleotide polymorphisms risk score in early breast cancer in the SIGNAL/PHARE prospective cohort: no correlation with clinico-pathological characteristics and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have to date identified 94 genetic variants (single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) associated with risk of developing breast cancer. A score based on the combined effect of the 94 risk alleles can be calculated to measure the global risk of breast cancer. We aimed to test the hypothesis that the 94-SNP-based risk score is associated with clinico-pathological characteristics, breast cancer subtypes and outcomes in early breast cancer. METHODS: A 94-SNP risk score was calculated in 8703 patients in the PHARE and SIGNAL prospective case cohorts. This score is the total number of inherited risk alleles based on 94 selected SNPs. Clinical data and outcomes were prospectively registered. Genotyping was obtained from a GWAS. RESULTS: The median 94-SNP risk score in 8703 patients with early breast cancer was 77.5 (range: 58.1-97.6). The risk score was not associated with usual prognostic and predictive factors (age; tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) status; Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade; inflammatory features; estrogen receptor status; progesterone receptor status; human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status) and did not correlate with breast cancer subtypes. The 94-SNP risk score did not predict outcomes represented by overall survival or disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective case cohort of 8703 patients, a risk score based on 94 SNPs was not associated with breast cancer characteristics, cancer subtypes, or patients' outcomes. If we hypothesize that prognosis and subtypes of breast cancer are determined by constitutional genetic factors, our results suggest that a score based on breast cancer risk-associated SNPs is not associated with prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PHARE cohort: NCT00381901 , Sept. 26, 2006 - SIGNAL cohort: INCa RECF1098, Jan. 28, 2009.