4.5 Article

Exome sequencing has higher diagnostic yield compared to simulated disease-specific panels in children with suspected monogenic disorders

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
Volume 26, Issue 5, Pages 644-651

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-018-0099-1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Melbourne Genomics
  2. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (Royal Melbourne Hospital)
  3. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (Royal Children's Hospital)
  4. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (University of Melbourne)
  5. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute)
  6. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (Murdoch Children's Research Institute)
  7. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (Australian Genome Research Facility)
  8. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (CSIRO)
  9. State Government of Victoria (Department of Health and Human Services)
  10. Bioplatforms Australia
  11. NCRIS program
  12. Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne
  13. Victorian Clinical Genetics Services

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As test costs decline, whole-exome sequencing (WES) has become increasingly used for clinical diagnosis, and now represents the primary alternative to gene panel testing for patients with a suspected genetic disorder. We sought to compare the diagnostic yield of singleton-WES with simulated application of commercial gene panels in children suspected of having a genetically heterogeneous condition. Recruitment, singleton-WES and phenotype-driven variant analysis was completed for 145 paediatric patients. At recruitment, clinicians were required to propose commercial gene panel tests as an alternative to WES and nominate a phenotype-driven candidate gene list. In WES-diagnosed children, three commercial options for each proposed panel were identified and evaluated for hypothetical diagnostic yield assuming 100% analytical sensitivity and specificity. We compared the price of WES with the least costly panel in WES-diagnosed children. In WES-undiagnosed children, we evaluated the exonic coverage of their phenotype-driven gene list using aggregate data. WES diagnoses were made in genes not included in at least one-of-three commercial panels in 42% of cases. Had a panel been selected instead, 23% of WES-diagnosed children would not have been diagnosed. In 26% of cases, the least costly panel option would have been more expensive than WES. Evaluation of WES coverage found that at the most stringent level of 20x coverage, the likelihood of missing a clinically relevant variant in a candidate gene list was maximally 8%. The broader coverage of WES makes it a superior alternative to gene panel testing at similar financial cost for children with suspected complex monogenic phenotypes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available