The impact of inversions across 33,924 families with rare disease from a national genome sequencing project.

Detection of structural variants (SVs) is currently biased toward those that alter copy number. The relative contribution of inversions toward genetic disease is unclear. In this study, we analyzed genome sequencing data for 33,924 families with rare disease from the 100,000 Genomes Project. From a database hosting >500 million SVs, we focused on 351 genes where haploinsufficiency is a confirmed disease mechanism and identified 47 ultra-rare rearrangements that included an inversion (24 bp to 36.4 Mb, 20/47 de novo). Validation utilized a number of orthogonal approaches, including retrospective exome analysis. RNA-seq data supported the respective diagnoses for six participants. Phenotypic blending was apparent in four probands. Diagnostic odysseys were a common theme (>50 years for one individual), and targeted analysis for the specific gene had already been performed for 30% of these individuals but with no findings. We provide formal confirmation of a European founder origin for an intragenic MSH2 inversion. For two individuals with complex SVs involving the MECP2 mutational hotspot, ambiguous SV structures were resolved using long-read sequencing, influencing clinical interpretation. A de novo inversion of HOXD11-13 was uncovered in a family with Kantaputra-type mesomelic dysplasia. Lastly, a complex translocation disrupting APC and involving nine rearranged segments confirmed a clinical diagnosis for three family members and resolved a conundrum for a sibling with a single polyp. Overall, inversions play a small but notable role in rare disease, likely explaining the etiology in around 1/750 families across heterogeneous clinical cohorts.

Improved sensitivity for detection of pathogenic variants in familial NF2-related schwannomatosis.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of additional genetic screening techniques on the rate of detection of pathogenic variants leading to familial NF2-related schwannomatosis. METHODS: We conducted genetic screening of a cohort of 168 second-generation individuals meeting the clinical criteria for NF2-related schwannomatosis. In addition to the current clinical screening techniques, targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification analysis, we applied additional genetic screening techniques, including karyotype and RNA analysis. For characterisation of a complex structural variant, we also performed long-read sequencing analysis. RESULTS: Additional genetic analysis resulted in increased sensitivity of detection of pathogenic variants from 87% to 95% in our second-generation NF2-related schwannomatosis cohort. A number of pathogenic variants identified through extended analysis had been previously observed after NGS analysis but had been overlooked or classified as variants of uncertain significance. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates there is added value in performing additional genetic analysis for detection of pathogenic variants that are difficult to identify with current clinical genetic screening methods. In particular, RNA analysis is valuable for accurate classification of non-canonical splicing variants. Karyotype analysis and whole genome sequencing analysis are of particular value for identification of large and/or complex structural variants, with additional advantages in the use of long-read sequencing techniques.

Genetic findings in people with schwannomas who do not meet clinical diagnostic criteria for NF2-related schwannomatosis.

BACKGROUND: Most schwannomas are isolated tumours occurring in otherwise healthy people. However, bilateral vestibular schwannomas (BVS) or multiple non-vestibular schwannomas indicate an underlying genetic predisposition. This is most commonly NF2-related schwannomatosis (SWN), but when BVS are absent, this can also indicate SMARCB1-related or LZTR1-related SWN. METHODS: We assessed the variant detection rates for the three major SWN genes (NF2, LZTR1 and SMARCB1) in 154 people, from 150 families, who had at least one non-vestibular schwannoma, but who did not meet clinical criteria for NF2-related SWN at the time of genetic testing. RESULTS: We found that 17 (11%) people from 13 families had a germline SMARCB1 variant and 19 (12%) unrelated individuals had a germline LZTR1 variant. 19 people had an NF2 variant, but 18 of these were mosaic and 17 were only detected when 2 tumours were available for testing. The overall detection rate was 25% using blood alone, but increased to 36% when tumour analysis was included. Another 12 people had a germline variant of uncertain significance (VUS). CONCLUSIONS: There were similar proportions of LZTR1, SMARCB1 or mosaic NF2. However, since an NF2 variant was detected in tumours from 103 people, it is likely that further cases of mosaicism would be detected if more people had additional tumours available for analysis. In addition, if further evidence becomes available to show that the VUSs are pathogenic, this would significantly increase the proportion of people with a genetic diagnosis. Our results indicate the importance of comprehensive genetic testing and improved variant classification.

Genome-wide association analysis identifies a susceptibility locus for sporadic vestibular schwannoma at 9p21.

Vestibular schwannomas are benign nerve sheath tumours that arise on the vestibulocochlear nerves. Vestibular schwannomas are known to occur in the context of tumour predisposition syndromes NF2-related and LZTR1-related schwannomatosis. However, the majority of vestibular schwannomas present sporadically without identification of germline pathogenic variants. To identify novel genetic associations with risk of vestibular schwannoma development, we conducted a genome-wide association study in a cohort of 911 sporadic vestibular schwannoma cases collated from the neurofibromatosis type 2 genetic testing service in the north-west of England, UK and 5500 control samples from the UK Biobank resource. One risk locus reached genome-wide significance in our association analysis (9p21.3, rs1556516, P = 1.47 × 10-13, odds ratio = 0.67, allele frequency = 0.52). 9p21.3 is a genome-wide association study association hotspot, and a number of genes are localized to this region, notably CDKN2B-AS1 and CDKN2A/B, also referred to as the INK4 locus. Dysregulation of gene products within the INK4 locus have been associated with multiple pathologies and the genes in this region have been observed to directly impact the expression of one another. Recurrent associations of the INK4 locus with components of well-described oncogenic pathways provides compelling evidence that the 9p21.3 region is truly associated with risk of vestibular schwannoma tumorigenesis.

Screening of potential novel candidate genes in schwannomatosis patients.

Schwannomatosis comprises a group of hereditary tumor predisposition syndromes characterized by, usually benign, multiple nerve sheath tumors, which frequently cause severe pain that does not typically respond to drug treatments. The most common schwannomatosis-associated gene is NF2, but SMARCB1 and LZTR1 are also associated. There are still many cases in which no pathogenic variants (PVs) have been identified, suggesting the existence of as yet unidentified genetic risk factors. In this study, we performed extended genetic screening of 75 unrelated schwannomatosis patients without identified germline PVs in NF2, LZTR1, or SMARCB1. Screening of the coding region of DGCR8, COQ6, CDKN2A, and CDKN2B was carried out, based on previous reports that point to these genes as potential candidate genes for schwannomatosis. Deletions or duplications in CDKN2A, CDKN2B, and adjacent chromosome 9 region were assessed by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification analysis. Sequencing analysis of a patient with multiple schwannomas and melanomas identified a novel duplication in the coding region of CDKN2A, disrupting both p14ARF and p16INK4a. Our results suggest that none of these genes are major contributors to schwannomatosis risk but the possibility remains that they may have a role in more complex mechanisms for tumor predisposition.

Pathogenic noncoding variants in the neurofibromatosis and schwannomatosis predisposition genes.

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), type 2 (NF2), and schwannomatosis are a group of autosomal dominant disorders that predispose to the development of nerve sheath tumors. Pathogenic variants (PVs) that cause NF1 and NF2 are located in the NF1 and NF2 loci, respectively. To date, most variants associated with schwannomatosis have been identified in the SMARCB1 and LZTR1 genes, and a missense variant in the DGCR8 gene was recently reported to predispose to schwannomas. In spite of the high detection rate for PVs in NF1 and NF2 (over 90% of non-mosaic germline variants can be identified by routine genetic screening) underlying PVs for a proportion of clinical cases remain undetected. A higher proportion of non-NF2 schwannomatosis cases have no detected PV, with PVs currently only identified in around 70%-86% of familial cases and 30%-40% of non-NF2 sporadic schwannomatosis cases. A number of variants of uncertain significance have been observed for each disorder, many of them located in noncoding, regulatory, or intergenic regions. Here we summarize noncoding variants in this group of genes and discuss their established or potential role in the pathogenesis of NF1, NF2, and schwannomatosis.

Typical 22q11.2 deletion syndrome appears to confer a reduced risk of schwannoma.

PURPOSE: The LZTR1 gene has been associated with schwannomatosis tumor predisposition and is located in a region that is deleted in the great majority (89%) of patients with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS). Since it is known that approximately 1 in 500 people in the general population will develop a sporadic schwannoma and there are no reports of the occurrence of schwannoma in 22q11.2DS, we investigated whether whole-gene deletion of LZTR1 occurs in schwannomatosis and assessed the risk of schwannoma in 22q11.2DS. METHODS: We assessed the genetic testing results for LZTR1-associated schwannomatosis and the clinical phenotypes of patients with 22q11.2DS. RESULTS: There were no reports of schwannoma in over 1,500 patients with 22q11.2DS. In addition, no patients meeting clinical diagnostic criteria for schwannomatosis had a whole-gene deletion in LZTR1. Only 1 patient in 110 with an apparently sporadic vestibular schwannoma had a constitutional whole-gene deletion of LZTR1. CONCLUSION: People with a large 22q11.2 deletion may have a reduced risk of developing a schwannoma compared to the general population.