PURPOSE To evaluate germline variants in hereditary cancer susceptibility genes among unselected cancer patients undergoing tumor-germline sequencing. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Germline sequence data from 439 individuals undergoing tumor-germline dyad sequencing through the LCCC1108/UNCseq™ (NCT01457196) study were analyzed for genetic variants in 36 hereditary cancer susceptibility genes. These variants were analyzed as an exploratory research study to determine if pathogenic variants exist within the germline of patients undergoing tumor-germline sequencing. Patients were unselected with respect to indicators of hereditary cancer predisposition. RESULTS Variants indicative of hereditary cancer predisposition were identified in 19 (4.3%) patients. For about half (10/19), these findings represent new diagnostic information with potentially important implications for the patient and their family. The others were previously identified through clinical genetic evaluation secondary to suspicion of a hereditary cancer predisposition. Genes with pathogenic variants included ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, and CHEK2. In contrast, a substantial proportion of patients (178, 40.5%) had Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS), 24 of which had VUS in genes pertinent to the presenting cancer. Another 143 had VUS in other hereditary cancer genes, and 11 had VUS in both pertinent and non-pertinent genes. CONCLUSION Germline analysis in tumor-germline sequencing dyads will occasionally reveal significant germline findings that were clinically occult, which could be beneficial for patients and their families. However, given the low yield for unexpected germline variation and the large proportion of patients with VUS results, analysis and return of germline results should adhere to guidelines for secondary findings rather than diagnostic hereditary cancer testing.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic yield and workflow of genome-scale sequencing in patients with neuromuscular disorders (NMDs).MethodsWe performed exome sequencing in 93 undiagnosed patients with various NMDs for whom a molecular diagnosis was not yet established. Variants on both targeted and broad diagnostic gene lists were identified. Prior diagnostic tests were extracted from the patient's medical record to evaluate the use of exome sequencing in the context of their prior diagnostic workup.ResultsThe overall diagnostic yield of exome sequencing in our cohort was 12.9%, with one or more pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants identified in a causative gene associated with the patient's disorder. Targeted gene lists had the same diagnostic yield as a broad NMD gene list in patients with clear neuropathy or myopathy phenotypes, but evaluation of a broader set of disease genes was needed for patients with complex NMD phenotypes. Most patients with NMD had undergone prior testing, but only 10/16 (63%) of these procedures, such as muscle biopsy, were informative in pointing to a final molecular diagnosis.ConclusionsGenome-scale sequencing or analysis of a panel of relevant genes used early in the evaluation of patients with NMDs can provide or clarify a diagnosis and minimize invasive testing in many cases.