Beyond the exome: What's next in diagnostic testing for Mendelian conditions.

Despite advances in clinical genetic testing, including the introduction of exome sequencing (ES), more than 50% of individuals with a suspected Mendelian condition lack a precise molecular diagnosis. Clinical evaluation is increasingly undertaken by specialists outside of clinical genetics, often occurring in a tiered fashion and typically ending after ES. The current diagnostic rate reflects multiple factors, including technical limitations, incomplete understanding of variant pathogenicity, missing genotype-phenotype associations, complex gene-environment interactions, and reporting differences between clinical labs. Maintaining a clear understanding of the rapidly evolving landscape of diagnostic tests beyond ES, and their limitations, presents a challenge for non-genetics professionals. Newer tests, such as short-read genome or RNA sequencing, can be challenging to order, and emerging technologies, such as optical genome mapping and long-read DNA sequencing, are not available clinically. Furthermore, there is no clear guidance on the next best steps after inconclusive evaluation. Here, we review why a clinical genetic evaluation may be negative, discuss questions to be asked in this setting, and provide a framework for further investigation, including the advantages and disadvantages of new approaches that are nascent in the clinical sphere. We present a guide for the next best steps after inconclusive molecular testing based upon phenotype and prior evaluation, including when to consider referral to research consortia focused on elucidating the underlying cause of rare unsolved genetic disorders.

Characteristics, Genetic Testing, and Diagnoses of Infants with Neonatal Encephalopathy Not Due to Hypoxic Ischemic Encephalopathy: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the presentation and evaluation of infants with neonatal encephalopathy (NE) not due to hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (non-HIE NE) and to describe the genetic abnormalities identified. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 193 non-HIE NE neonates admitted to a level IV NICU from 2015 through 2019. For changes in testing over time, Cochrane-Armitage test for trend was used with a Bonferroni-corrected P-value, and comparison between groups was performed using Fisher exact test. RESULT: The most common symptom of non-HIE NE was abnormal tone in 47% (90/193). Ten percent (19/193) died prior to discharge, and 48% of survivors (83/174) required medical equipment at discharge. Forty percent (77/193) underwent genetic testing as an inpatient. Of 52 chromosomal studies, 54 targeted tests, and 16 exome sequences, 10%, 41%, and 69% were diagnostic, respectively, with no difference in diagnostic rates between infants with and without an associated congenital anomaly and/or dysmorphic feature. Twenty-eight genetic diagnoses were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Neonates with non-HIE NE have high rates of morbidity and mortality and may benefit from early genetic testing, even in the absence of other exam findings. This study broadens our knowledge of genetic conditions underlying non-HIE NE, which may enable families and care teams to anticipate the needs of the individual, allow early initiation of targeted therapies, and facilitate decisions surrounding goals of care.