Reproductive genetic carrier screening aims to offer couples information about their chance of having children with certain autosomal recessive and X-linked genetic conditions. We developed a gene list for use in "Mackenzie's Mission", a research project in which 10,000 couples will undergo screening. Criteria for selecting genes were: the condition should be lifelimiting or disabling, with childhood onset, such that couples would be likely to take steps to avoid having an affected child; and/or be one for which early diagnosis and intervention would substantially change outcome. Strong evidence for genephenotype relationship was required. Candidate genes were identified from OMIM and via review of 23 commercial and published gene lists. Genes were reviewed by 16 clinical geneticists using a standard operating procedure, in a process overseen by a multidisciplinary committee which included clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, an ethicist, a parent of a child with a genetic condition and scientists from diagnostic and research backgrounds. 1300 genes met criteria. Genes associated with non-syndromic deafness and non-syndromic differences of sex development were not included. Our experience has highlighted that gene selection for a carrier screening panel needs to be a dynamic process with ongoing review and refinement.

ObjectiveTo assess the benefits and limitations of whole genome sequencing (WGS) compared to exome sequencing (ES) or multigene panel (MGP) in the molecular diagnosis of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEE).MethodsWe performed WGS of 30 comprehensively phenotyped DEE patient trios that were undiagnosed after first-tier testing, including chromosomal microarray and either research ES (n = 15) or diagnostic MGP (n = 15).ResultsEight diagnoses were made in the 15 individuals who received prior ES (53%): 3 individuals had complex structural variants; 5 had ES-detectable variants, which now had additional evidence for pathogenicity. Eleven diagnoses were made in the 15 MGP-negative individuals (68%); the majority (n = 10) involved genes not included in the panel, particularly in individuals with postneonatal onset of seizures and those with more complex presentations including movement disorders, dysmorphic features, or multiorgan involvement. A total of 42% of diagnoses were autosomal recessive or X-chromosome linked.ConclusionWGS was able to improve diagnostic yield over ES primarily through the detection of complex structural variants (n = 3). The higher diagnostic yield was otherwise better attributed to the power of re-analysis rather than inherent advantages of the WGS platform. Additional research is required to assist in the assessment of pathogenicity of novel noncoding and complex structural variants and further improve diagnostic yield for patients with DEE and other neurogenetic disorders.