When moments matter: Finding answers with rapid exome sequencing.

BACKGROUND: When time is of the essence in critical care cases, a fast molecular diagnosis is often necessary to help health care providers quickly determine best next steps for treatments, prognosis, and counseling of their patients. In this paper, we present the diagnostic rates and improved quality of life for patients undergoing clinical rapid exome sequencing. METHODS: The clinical histories and results of 41 patients undergoing rapid exome sequencing were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Clinical rapid exome sequencing identified a definitive diagnosis in 13/41 (31.7%) and other relevant findings in 17 of the patients (41.5%). The average time to verbal report was 7 days; to written report was 11 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations demonstrate the utility and effectiveness of rapid family-based diagnostic exome sequencing in improving patients care.

Clinical diagnostic exome sequencing in dystonia: Genetic testing challenges for complex conditions.

Patients with dystonia are particularly appropriate for diagnostic exome sequencing (DES), due to the complex, diverse features and genetic heterogeneity. Personal and family history data were collected from test requisition forms and medical records from 189 patients with reported dystonia and available family members received for clinical DES. Of them, 20.2% patients had a positive genetic finding associated with dystonia. Detection rates for cases with isolated and combined dystonia were 22.4% and 25.0%, respectively. 71.4% of the cohort had co-occurring non-movement-related findings and a detection rate of 24.4%. Patients with childhood-onset dystonia trended toward higher detection rates (31.8%) compared to infancy (23.6%), adolescence (12.5%), and early-adulthood onset (16%). Uncharacterized gene findings were found in 6.7% (8/119) of cases that underwent analysis for genes without an established disease relationship. Patients with intellectual disability/developmental delay, seizures/epilepsy and/or multifocal dystonia were more likely to have positive findings (P = .0093, .0397, .0006). Four (2.1%) patients had findings in two genes, and seven (3.7%) had reclassification after the original report due to new literature, new clinical information or reanalysis request. Pediatric patients were more likely to have positive findings (P = .0180). Our observations show utility of family-based DES in patients with dystonia and illustrate the complexity of testing.

De novo ITPR1 variants are a recurrent cause of early-onset ataxia, acting via loss of channel function.

We explored the clinico-genetic basis of spinocerebellar ataxia 29 (SCA29) by determining the frequency, phenotype, and functional impact of ITPR1 missense variants associated with early-onset ataxia (EOA). Three hundred thirty one patients from a European EOA target cohort (n = 120), US-American EOA validation cohort (n = 72), and early-onset epileptic encephalopathy (EOEE) control cohort (n = 139) were screened for de novo ITPR1 variants. The target cohort was also screened for inherited ITPR1 variants. The variants' functional impact was determined by IP3-induced Ca2+ release in HEK293 cells. 3/120 patients (2.5%) from the target cohort and 4/72 patients (5.5%) from the validation cohort, but none from the EOEE control cohort, carried de novo ITPR1 variants. However, most ITPR1 variants (7/10 = 70%) in the target cohort were inherited from a healthy parent, with 3/6 patients carrying disease-causing variants in other genes. This suggests limited or no phenotypic impact of many ITPR1 missense variants, even if ultra-rare and well-conserved. While common bioinformatics tools did not discriminate de novo from other ITPR1 variants, functional characterization demonstrated reduced IP3-induced Ca2+ release for all de novo variants, including the recurrent c.805C>T (p.(R269W)) variant. In sum, these findings show that de novo ITPR1 missense variants are a recurrent cause of EOA (SCA29) across independent cohorts, acting via loss of IP3 channel function. Inherited ITPR1 variants are also enriched in EOA, but often without strong impact, albeit rare and well-conserved. Functional studies allow identifying ITPR1 variants with large impact, likely disease-causing. Such functional confirmation is warranted for inherited ITPR1 variants before making a SCA29 diagnosis.

Clinical diagnostic exome evaluation for an infant with a lethal disorder: genetic diagnosis of TARP syndrome and expansion of the phenotype in a patient with a newly reported RBM10 alteration.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic Exome Sequencing (DES) has been shown to be an effective tool for diagnosis individuals with suspected genetic conditions. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a male infant born with multiple anomalies including bilateral dysplastic kidneys, cleft palate, bilateral talipes, and bilateral absence of thumbs and first toes. Prenatal testing including chromosome analysis and microarray did not identify a cause for the multiple congenital anomalies. Postnatal diagnostic exome studies (DES) were utilized to find a molecular diagnosis for the patient. Exome sequencing of the proband, mother, and father showed a previously unreported maternally inherited RNA binding motif protein 10 (RBM10) c.1352_1353delAG (p.E451Vfs*66) alteration. Mutations in RBM10 are associated with TARP syndrome, an X-linked recessive disorder originally described with cardinal features of talipes equinovarus, atrial septal defect, Robin sequence, and persistent left superior vena cava. CONCLUSION: DES established a molecular genetic diagnosis of TARP syndrome for a neonatal patient with a poor prognosis in whom traditional testing methods were uninformative and allowed for efficient diagnosis and future reproductive options for the parents. Other reported cases of TARP syndrome demonstrate significant variability in clinical phenotype. The reported features in this infant including multiple hemivertebrae, imperforate anus, aplasia of thumbs and first toes have not been reported in previous patients, thus expanding the clinical phenotype for this rare disorder.

Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the clinical and molecular characteristics of 2,079 patients who underwent hereditary cancer multigene panel testing. METHODS: Panels included comprehensive analysis of 14-22 cancer susceptibility genes (BRCA1 and BRCA2 not included), depending on the panel ordered (BreastNext, OvaNext, ColoNext, or CancerNext). Next-generation sequencing and deletion/duplication analyses were performed for all genes except EPCAM (deletion/duplication analysis only). Clinical histories of ColoNext patients harboring mutations in genes with well-established diagnostic criteria were assessed to determine whether diagnostic/testing criteria were met. RESULTS: Positive rates were defined as the proportion of patients with a pathogenic mutation/likely pathogenic variant(s) and were as follows: 7.4% for BreastNext, 7.2% for OvaNext, 9.2% for ColoNext, and 9.6% for CancerNext. Inconclusive results were found in 19.8% of BreastNext, 25.6% of OvaNext, 15.1% of ColoNext, and 23.5% of CancerNext tests. Based on information submitted by clinicians, 30% of ColoNext patients with mutations in genes with well-established diagnostic criteria did not meet corresponding criteria. CONCLUSION: Our data point to an important role for targeted multigene panels in diagnosing hereditary cancer predisposition, particularly for patients with clinical histories spanning several possible diagnoses and for patients with suspicious clinical histories not meeting diagnostic criteria for a specific hereditary cancer syndrome.

Patient decisions for disclosure of secondary findings among the first 200 individuals undergoing clinical diagnostic exome sequencing.

PURPOSE: Exome sequencing of a single individual for a clinical indication may result in the identification of incidental deleterious variants unrelated to the indication for testing (secondary findings). Given the recent availability of clinical exome testing, there is a limited knowledge regarding the disclosure preferences and impact of secondary findings in a clinical diagnostic setting. In this article, we provide preliminary data regarding the preferences for secondary findings results disclosure based on the first 200 families referred to Ambry Genetics for diagnostic exome sequencing. METHODS: Secondary findings were categorized into four groups in the diagnostic exome sequencing consent: carrier status of recessive disorders, predisposition to later-onset disease, predisposition to increased cancer risk, and early-onset disease. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of patient responses regarding the preferences for secondary findings disclosure. RESULTS: The majority of patients (187/200; 93.5%) chose to receive secondary results for one or more available categories. Adult probands were more likely than children to opt for blinding of secondary data (16 vs. 4%, respectively). Among responses for blinding, preferences were evenly scattered among categories. CONCLUSION: These data represent the unprecedented results of a large reference laboratory providing clinical exome sequencing. We report, for the first time, the preferences of patients and families for the receipt of secondary findings based on clinical genome sequencing. Overwhelmingly, families undergoing exome sequencing opt for the disclosure of secondary findings. The data may have implications regarding the development of guidelines for secondary findings reporting among patients with severe and/or life-threatening disease undergoing clinical genomic sequencing.