Future of Dutch NGS-Based Newborn Screening: Exploring the Technical Possibilities and Assessment of a Variant Classification Strategy.

In this study, we compare next-generation sequencing (NGS) approaches (targeted panel (tNGS), whole exome sequencing (WES), and whole genome sequencing (WGS)) for application in newborn screening (NBS). DNA was extracted from dried blood spots (DBS) from 50 patients with genetically confirmed inherited metabolic disorders (IMDs) and 50 control samples. One hundred IMD-related genes were analyzed. Two data-filtering strategies were applied: one to detect only (likely) pathogenic ((L)P) variants, and one to detect (L)P variants in combination with variants of unknown significance (VUS). The variants were filtered and interpreted, defining true/false positives (TP/FP) and true/false negatives (TN/FN). The variant filtering strategies were assessed in a background cohort (BC) of 4833 individuals. Reliable results were obtained within 5 days. TP results (47 patient samples) for tNGS, WES, and WGS results were 33, 31, and 30, respectively, using the (L)P filtering, and 40, 40, and 38, respectively, when including VUS. FN results were 11, 13, and 14, respectively, excluding VUS, and 4, 4, and 6, when including VUS. The remaining FN were mainly samples with a homozygous VUS. All controls were TN. Three BC individuals showed a homozygous (L)P variant, all related to a variable, mild phenotype. The use of NGS-based workflows in NBS seems promising, although more knowledge of data handling, automated variant interpretation, and costs is needed before implementation.

Genome sequencing as a generic diagnostic strategy for rare disease.

BACKGROUND: To diagnose the full spectrum of hereditary and congenital diseases, genetic laboratories use many different workflows, ranging from karyotyping to exome sequencing. A single generic high-throughput workflow would greatly increase efficiency. We assessed whether genome sequencing (GS) can replace these existing workflows aimed at germline genetic diagnosis for rare disease. METHODS: We performed short-read GS (NovaSeq™6000; 150 bp paired-end reads, 37 × mean coverage) on 1000 cases with 1271 known clinically relevant variants, identified across different workflows, representative of our tertiary diagnostic centers. Variants were categorized into small variants (single nucleotide variants and indels < 50 bp), large variants (copy number variants and short tandem repeats) and other variants (structural variants and aneuploidies). Variant calling format files were queried per variant, from which workflow-specific true positive rates (TPRs) for detection were determined. A TPR of ≥ 98% was considered the threshold for transition to GS. A GS-first scenario was generated for our laboratory, using diagnostic efficacy and predicted false negative as primary outcome measures. As input, we modeled the diagnostic path for all 24,570 individuals referred in 2022, combining the clinical referral, the transition of the underlying workflow(s) to GS, and the variant type(s) to be detected. RESULTS: Overall, 95% (1206/1271) of variants were detected. Detection rates differed per variant category: small variants in 96% (826/860), large variants in 93% (341/366), and other variants in 87% (39/45). TPRs varied between workflows (79-100%), with 7/10 being replaceable by GS. Models for our laboratory indicate that a GS-first strategy would be feasible for 84.9% of clinical referrals (750/883), translating to 71% of all individuals (17,444/24,570) receiving GS as their primary test. An estimated false negative rate of 0.3% could be expected. CONCLUSIONS: GS can capture clinically relevant germline variants in a 'GS-first strategy' for the majority of clinical indications in a genetics diagnostic lab.

Lessons learned from rapid exome sequencing for 575 critically ill patients across the broad spectrum of rare disease.

Introduction: Rapid exome sequencing (rES) has become the first-choice genetic test for critically ill patients, mostly neonates, young infants, or fetuses in prenatal care, in time-sensitive situations and when it is expected that the genetic test result may guide clinical decision making. The implementation of rES has revolutionized medicine by enabling timely identification of genetic causes for various rare diseases. The utilization of rES has increasingly been recognized as an essential diagnostic tool for the identification of complex and undiagnosed genetic disorders. Methods: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of our experiences with rES performed on 575 critically ill patients from various age groups (prenatal to adulthood), over a four-year period (2016-2019). These patients presented with a wide spectrum of rare diseases, including but not limited to neurological disorders, severe combined immune deficiency, and cancer. Results: During the study period, there was a significant increase in rES referrals, with a rise from a total of two referrals in Q1-2016 to 10 referrals per week in Q4-2019. The median turnaround time (TAT) decreased from 17 to 11 days in the period 2016-2019, with an overall median TAT of 11 days (IQR 8-15 days). The overall diagnostic yield for this cohort was 30.4%, and did not significantly differ between the different age groups (e.g. adults 22.2% vs children 31.0%; p-value 0.35). However, variability in yield was observed between clinical entities: craniofacial anomalies yielded 58.3%, while for three clinical entities (severe combined immune deficiency, aneurysm, and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism) no diagnoses were obtained. Discussion: Importantly, whereas clinical significance is often only attributed to a conclusive diagnosis, we also observed impact on clinical decision-making for individuals in whom no genetic diagnosis was established. Hence, our experience shows that rES has an important role for patients of all ages and across the broad spectrum of rare diseases to impact clinical outcomes.