Five years' experience of the clinical exome sequencing in a Spanish single center.

Nowadays, exome sequencing is a robust and cost-efficient genetic diagnostic tool already implemented in many clinical laboratories. Despite it has undoubtedly improved our diagnostic capacity and has allowed the discovery of many new Mendelian-disease genes, it only provides a molecular diagnosis in up to 25-30% of cases. Here, we comprehensively evaluate the results of a large sample set of 4974 clinical exomes performed in our laboratory over a period of 5 years, showing a global diagnostic rate of 24.62% (1391/4974). For the evaluation we establish different groups of diseases and demonstrate how the diagnostic rate is not only dependent on the analyzed group of diseases (43.12% in ophthalmological cases vs 16.61% in neurological cases) but on the specific disorder (47.49% in retinal dystrophies vs 24.02% in optic atrophy; 18.88% in neuropathies/paraparesias vs 11.43% in dementias). We also detail the most frequent mutated genes within each group of disorders and discuss, on our experience, further investigations and directions needed for the benefit of patients.

Sanger sequencing is no longer always necessary based on a single-center validation of 1109 NGS variants in 825 clinical exomes.

Despite the improved accuracy of next-generation sequencing (NGS), it is widely accepted that variants need to be validated using Sanger sequencing before reporting. Validation of all NGS variants considerably increases the turnaround time and costs of clinical diagnosis. We comprehensively assessed this need in 1109 variants from 825 clinical exomes, the largest sample set to date assessed using Illumina chemistry reported. With a concordance of 100%, we conclude that Sanger sequencing can be very useful as an internal quality control, but not so much as a verification method for high-quality single-nucleotide and small insertion/deletions variants. Laboratories might validate and establish their own thresholds before discontinuing Sanger confirmation studies. We also expand and validate 23 copy number variations detected by exome sequencing in 20 samples, observing a concordance of 95.65% (22/23).