Structural and non-coding variants increase the diagnostic yield of clinical whole genome sequencing for rare diseases

Abstract

Background Whole genome sequencing is increasingly being used for the diagnosis of patients with rare diseases. However, the diagnostic yields of many studies, particularly those conducted in a healthcare setting, are often disappointingly low, at 25–30%. This is in part because although entire genomes are sequenced, analysis is often confined to in silico gene panels or coding regions of the genome. Methods We undertook WGS on a cohort of 122 unrelated rare disease patients and their relatives (300 genomes) who had been pre-screened by gene panels or arrays. Patients were recruited from a broad spectrum of clinical specialties. We applied a bioinformatics pipeline that would allow comprehensive analysis of all variant types. We combined established bioinformatics tools for phenotypic and genomic analysis with our novel algorithms (SVRare, ALTSPLICE and GREEN-DB) to detect and annotate structural, splice site and non-coding variants. Results Our diagnostic yield was 43/122 cases (35%), although 47/122 cases (39%) were considered solved when considering novel candidate genes with supporting functional data into account. Structural, splice site and deep intronic variants contributed to 20/47 (43%) of our solved cases. Five genes that are novel, or were novel at the time of discovery, were identified, whilst a further three genes are putative novel disease genes with evidence of causality. We identified variants of uncertain significance in a further fourteen candidate genes. The phenotypic spectrum associated with RMND1 was expanded to include polymicrogyria. Two patients with secondary findings in FBN1 and KCNQ1 were confirmed to have previously unidentified Marfan and long QT syndromes, respectively, and were referred for further clinical interventions. Clinical diagnoses were changed in six patients and treatment adjustments made for eight individuals, which for five patients was considered life-saving. Conclusions Genome sequencing is increasingly being considered as a first-line genetic test in routine clinical settings and can make a substantial contribution to rapidly identifying a causal aetiology for many patients, shortening their diagnostic odyssey. We have demonstrated that structural, splice site and intronic variants make a significant contribution to diagnostic yield and that comprehensive analysis of the entire genome is essential to maximise the value of clinical genome sequencing.

Parental Engagement in Identifying Information Needs After Newborn Screening for Families of Infants with Suspected Athymia

“…6/33 patients (18%) were referred with genetically undefined T − B + NK + SCID requiring further investigations before deciding the most appropriate corrective procedure, HSCT or TT. These investigations included broader genetic testing with agnostic analyses [ 60 , 61 ] and diagnostic research assays to test the ability of their CD34 + haematopoietic stem and progenitor cells to differentiate into CD3 + T lymphocytes in vitro to help distinguish haematopoietic cell-intrinsic defects from thymic defects [ 62 – 64 ]. Overall, 18/33 patients were accepted for TT and 2/33 underwent HSCT.…”

Molecular mechanisms of human overgrowth and use of omics in its diagnostics: chances and challenges

“…Next-generation-based DNA sequencing strategies are already established in the clinical practice of rare diseases including overgrowth syndromes ( Pagnamenta et al, 2023 ), however gene expression data are hardly utilized in routine clinical practice. A recent exploratory study has demonstrated the potential for gene expression profiling to aid in both, the diagnosis and classification of a disease entity.…”

Expanding Genotype–Phenotype Correlation of CLCNKA and CLCNKB Variants Linked to Hearing Loss

“…Although copy-number changes in exome sequencing can be used to infer deletions, it can be challenging to draw conclusions, especially in homologous regions like CLCNKA and CLCNKB. WGS theoretically has a higher ability to identify a more diverse spectrum of variant profiles, including deep intronic, regulatory, andSVs, compared to exome sequencing [25]. Accordingly, its coverage includes the findings of all other genomic approaches.…”