4.7 Article

Objective Evaluation of Clinical Actionability for Genes Involved in Myopathies: 63 Genes with a Medical Value for Patient Care

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158506

关键词

genetics; myopathy; actionability; next generation sequencing; diagnostic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The implementation of high-throughput diagnostic sequencing has led to challenges in interpretation of mutational data, calling for prioritization of gene analysis in diagnostic and management settings. Objective assessment of clinical actionability of genes in myopathies using ClinGen scoring method provided important insights for diagnostic approaches and genetic disease management.
The implementation of high-throughput diagnostic sequencing has led to the generation of large amounts of mutational data, making their interpretation more complex and responsible for long delays. It has been important to prioritize certain analyses, particularly those of actionable genes in diagnostic situations, involving specific treatment and/or management. In our project, we carried out an objective assessment of the clinical actionability of genes involved in myopathies, for which only few data obtained methodologically exist to date. Using the ClinGen Actionability criteria, we scored the clinical actionability of all 199 genes implicated in myopathies published by FILNEMUS for the National French consensus on gene Lists for the diagnosis of myopathies using next generation sequencing. We objectified that 63 myopathy genes were actionable with the currently available data. Among the 36 myopathy genes with the highest actionability scores, only 8 had been scored to date by ClinGen. The data obtained through these methodological tools are an important resource for strategic choices in diagnostic approaches and the management of genetic myopathies. The clinical actionability of genes has to be considered as an evolving concept, in relation to progresses in disease knowledge and therapeutic approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据