The contribution of mosaicism to genetic diseases and de novo pathogenic variants.

The contribution of mosaicism to diagnosed genetic disease and presumed de novo variants (DNV) is under investigated. We determined the contribution of mosaic genetic disease (MGD) and diagnosed parental mosaicism (PM) in parents of offspring with reported DNV (in the same variant) in the (1) Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) (N = 1946) and (2) in 12,472 individuals electronic health records (EHR) who underwent genetic testing at an academic medical center. In the UDN, we found 4.51% of diagnosed probands had MGD, and 2.86% of parents of those with DNV exhibited PM. In the EHR, we found 6.03% and 2.99% and (of diagnosed probands) had MGD detected on chromosomal microarray and exome/genome sequencing, respectively. We found 2.34% (of those with a presumed pathogenic DNV) had a parent with PM for the variant. We detected mosaicism (regardless of pathogenicity) in 4.49% of genetic tests performed. We found a broad phenotypic spectrum of MGD with previously unknown phenotypic phenomena. MGD is highly heterogeneous and provides a significant contribution to genetic diseases. Further work is required to improve the diagnosis of MGD and investigate how PM contributes to DNV risk.

Finding commonalities in rare diseases through the undiagnosed diseases network.

OBJECTIVE: When studying any specific rare disease, heterogeneity and scarcity of affected individuals has historically hindered investigators from discerning on what to focus to understand and diagnose a disease. New nongenomic methodologies must be developed that identify similarities in seemingly dissimilar conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study analyzes 1042 patients from the Undiagnosed Diseases Network (2015-2019), a multicenter, nationwide research study using phenotypic data annotated by specialized staff using Human Phenotype Ontology terms. We used Louvain community detection to cluster patients linked by Jaccard pairwise similarity and 2 support vector classifier to assign new cases. We further validated the clusters' most representative comorbidities using a national claims database (67 million patients). RESULTS: Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with symptom onset before 18 years of age (n = 810) and at 18 years of age or older (n = 232) (average symptom onset age: 10 [interquartile range, 0-14] years). For 810 pediatric patients, we identified 4 statistically significant clusters. Two clusters were characterized by growth disorders, and developmental delay enriched for hypotonia presented a higher likelihood of diagnosis. Support vector classifier showed 0.89 balanced accuracy (0.83 for Human Phenotype Ontology terms only) on test data. DISCUSSIONS: To set the framework for future discovery, we chose as our endpoint the successful grouping of patients by phenotypic similarity and provide a classification tool to assign new patients to those clusters. CONCLUSION: This study shows that despite the scarcity and heterogeneity of patients, we can still find commonalities that can potentially be harnessed to uncover new insights and targets for therapy.

Commonalities across computational workflows for uncovering explanatory variants in undiagnosed cases.

PURPOSE: Genomic sequencing has become an increasingly powerful and relevant tool to be leveraged for the discovery of genetic aberrations underlying rare, Mendelian conditions. Although the computational tools incorporated into diagnostic workflows for this task are continually evolving and improving, we nevertheless sought to investigate commonalities across sequencing processing workflows to reveal consensus and standard practice tools and highlight exploratory analyses where technical and theoretical method improvements would be most impactful. METHODS: We collected details regarding the computational approaches used by a genetic testing laboratory and 11 clinical research sites in the United States participating in the Undiagnosed Diseases Network via meetings with bioinformaticians, online survey forms, and analyses of internal protocols. RESULTS: We found that tools for processing genomic sequencing data can be grouped into four distinct categories. Whereas well-established practices exist for initial variant calling and quality control steps, there is substantial divergence across sites in later stages for variant prioritization and multimodal data integration, demonstrating a diversity of approaches for solving the most mysterious undiagnosed cases. CONCLUSION: The largest differences across diagnostic workflows suggest that advances in structural variant detection, noncoding variant interpretation, and integration of additional biomedical data may be especially promising for solving chronically undiagnosed cases.

Clinical sites of the Undiagnosed Diseases Network: unique contributions to genomic medicine and science.

PURPOSE: The NIH Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) evaluates participants with disorders that have defied diagnosis, applying personalized clinical and genomic evaluations and innovative research. The clinical sites of the UDN are essential to advancing the UDN mission; this study assesses their contributions relative to standard clinical practices. METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from four UDN clinical sites, from July 2015 to September 2019, for diagnoses, new disease gene discoveries and the underlying investigative methods. RESULTS: Of 791 evaluated individuals, 231 received 240 diagnoses and 17 new disease-gene associations were recognized. Straightforward diagnoses on UDN exome and genome sequencing occurred in 35% (84/240). We considered these tractable in standard clinical practice, although genome sequencing is not yet widely available clinically. The majority (156/240, 65%) required additional UDN-driven investigations, including 90 diagnoses that occurred after prior nondiagnostic exome sequencing and 45 diagnoses (19%) that were nongenetic. The UDN-driven investigations included complementary/supplementary phenotyping, innovative analyses of genomic variants, and collaborative science for functional assays and animal modeling. CONCLUSION: Investigations driven by the clinical sites identified diagnostic and research paradigms that surpass standard diagnostic processes. The new diagnoses, disease gene discoveries, and delineation of novel disorders represent a model for genomic medicine and science.

Correction to: Sequencing and curation strategies for identifying candidate glioblastoma treatments.

Following publication of the original article [1], it was reported that the given name of the fourteenth author was incorrectly published. The incorrect and the correct names are given below.

Sequencing and curation strategies for identifying candidate glioblastoma treatments.

BACKGROUND: Prompted by the revolution in high-throughput sequencing and its potential impact for treating cancer patients, we initiated a clinical research study to compare the ability of different sequencing assays and analysis methods to analyze glioblastoma tumors and generate real-time potential treatment options for physicians. METHODS: A consortium of seven institutions in New York City enrolled 30 patients with glioblastoma and performed tumor whole genome sequencing (WGS) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq; collectively WGS/RNA-seq); 20 of these patients were also analyzed with independent targeted panel sequencing. We also compared results of expert manual annotations with those from an automated annotation system, Watson Genomic Analysis (WGA), to assess the reliability and time required to identify potentially relevant pharmacologic interventions. RESULTS: WGS/RNAseq identified more potentially actionable clinical results than targeted panels in 90% of cases, with an average of 16-fold more unique potentially actionable variants identified per individual; 84 clinically actionable calls were made using WGS/RNA-seq that were not identified by panels. Expert annotation and WGA had good agreement on identifying variants [mean sensitivity = 0.71, SD = 0.18 and positive predictive value (PPV) = 0.80, SD = 0.20] and drug targets when the same variants were called (mean sensitivity = 0.74, SD = 0.34 and PPV = 0.79, SD = 0.23) across patients. Clinicians used the information to modify their treatment plan 10% of the time. CONCLUSION: These results present the first comprehensive comparison of technical and machine augmented analysis of targeted panel and WGS/RNA-seq to identify potential cancer treatments.

Effect of Genetic Diagnosis on Patients with Previously Undiagnosed Disease.

BACKGROUND: Many patients remain without a diagnosis despite extensive medical evaluation. The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) was established to apply a multidisciplinary model in the evaluation of the most challenging cases and to identify the biologic characteristics of newly discovered diseases. The UDN, which is funded by the National Institutes of Health, was formed in 2014 as a network of seven clinical sites, two sequencing cores, and a coordinating center. Later, a central biorepository, a metabolomics core, and a model organisms screening center were added. METHODS: We evaluated patients who were referred to the UDN over a period of 20 months. The patients were required to have an undiagnosed condition despite thorough evaluation by a health care provider. We determined the rate of diagnosis among patients who subsequently had a complete evaluation, and we observed the effect of diagnosis on medical care. RESULTS: A total of 1519 patients (53% female) were referred to the UDN, of whom 601 (40%) were accepted for evaluation. Of the accepted patients, 192 (32%) had previously undergone exome sequencing. Symptoms were neurologic in 40% of the applicants, musculoskeletal in 10%, immunologic in 7%, gastrointestinal in 7%, and rheumatologic in 6%. Of the 382 patients who had a complete evaluation, 132 received a diagnosis, yielding a rate of diagnosis of 35%. A total of 15 diagnoses (11%) were made by clinical review alone, and 98 (74%) were made by exome or genome sequencing. Of the diagnoses, 21% led to recommendations regarding changes in therapy, 37% led to changes in diagnostic testing, and 36% led to variant-specific genetic counseling. We defined 31 new syndromes. CONCLUSIONS: The UDN established a diagnosis in 132 of the 382 patients who had a complete evaluation, yielding a rate of diagnosis of 35%. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health Common Fund.).

Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers.

BACKGROUND: The majority of undiagnosed diseases manifest with objective findings that warrant further investigation. The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) receives applications from patients whose symptoms and signs have been intractable to diagnosis; however, many UDN applicants are affected primarily by subjective symptoms such as pain and fatigue. We sought to characterize presenting symptoms, referral sources, and demographic factors of applicants to the UDN to identify factors that may determine application outcome and potentially differentiate between those with undiagnosed diseases (with more objective findings) and those who are less likely to have an undiagnosed disease (more subjective symptoms). METHODS: We used a systematic retrospective review of 151 consecutive Not Accepted and 50 randomly selected Accepted UDN applications. The primary outcome was whether an applicant was Accepted, or Not Accepted, and, if accepted, whether or not a diagnosis was made. Objective and subjective symptoms and information on prior specialty consultations were collected from provider referral letters. Demographic data and decision data on network acceptance were gathered from the UDN online portal. RESULTS: Fewer objective findings and more subjective symptoms were found in the Not Accepted applications. Not Accepted referrals also were from older individuals, reported a shorter period of illness, and were referred to the UDN by their primary care physicians. All of these differences reached statistical significance in comparison with Accepted applications. The frequency of subspecialty consults for diagnostic purposes prior to UDN application was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The preponderance of subjective and lack of objective findings in the Not Accepted applications distinguish these from applicants that are accepted for evaluation and diagnostic efforts through the UDN. Not Accepted applicants are referred primarily by their primary care providers after multiple specialist consultations fail to yield answers. Distinguishing between patients with undiagnosed diseases with objective findings and those with primarily subjective findings can delineate patients who would benefit from further diagnostic processes from those who may have functional disorders and need alternative pathways for management of their symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02450851 , posted May 21st 2015.

Clinical whole exome sequencing from dried blood spot identifies novel genetic defect underlying asparagine synthetase deficiency.

We add two novel variants to the existing mutation spectrum of ASNS gene. Loss of ASNS function should be suspected in newborns presenting with congenital microcephaly, intellectual disability, progressive cerebral atrophy, and intractable seizures. Acquisition and sequencing of stored newborn blood spot can be a valuable option when no biological samples are available from a deceased child.

Using FISH to increase the yield and accuracy of karyotypes from spontaneous abortion specimens.

OBJECTIVE: Cytogenetic analysis of spontaneous abortions is frequently complicated by culture failure and maternal cell contamination (MCC). The objective of the study is to demonstrate that multiplex fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) can increase the yield and accuracy of karyotypes from spontaneous abortion specimens. METHOD: A multiplex interphase FISH probe set was used to analyze two sample sets. (1) Uncultured tissues from 153 abortions samples with a normal 46,XX karyotype and (2) a series of 171 samples that either failed to grow or were contaminated. MCC studies were performed on 70 cultures where both karyotype and FISH indicated a normal female karyotype. RESULTS: FISH showed 31% (53/171) of the specimens karyotyped as 46,XX were either male or abnormal; 23% (40/118) of these specimens were found to have an abnormal chromosome complement. In specimens with culture failure, FISH showed an abnormal complement in 44.4% (68/153). MCC studies showed 41.49% (29/70) cultures of maternal origin, 45.7% (32/70) fetal, 11.4% (8/70) a maternal/fetal mixture and 1 diploid mole. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate the utility of a simple FISH panel in increasing the detection rate of abnormal karyotypes. They also reveal the high frequency of overgrowth of maternal cells in cultured specimens from villi after embryonic loss.