Variant classification changes over time in the clinical molecular diagnostic laboratory setting.

BACKGROUND: Variant classification in the setting of germline genetic testing is necessary for patients and their families to receive proper care. Variants are classified as pathogenic (P), likely pathogenic (LP), uncertain significance (VUS), likely benign (LB) and benign (B) using the standards and guidelines recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics and the Association for Molecular Pathology, with modifications for specific genes. As the literature continues to rapidly expand, and evidence continues to accumulate, prior classifications can be updated accordingly. In this study, we aim to characterise variant reclassifications in Ontario. METHODS: DNA samples from patients seen at hereditary cancer clinics in Ontario from January 2012 to April 2022 were submitted for testing. Patients met provincial eligibility criteria for testing for hereditary cancer syndromes or polycystic kidney disease. Reclassification events were determined to be within their broader category of significance (B to LB or vice versa, or P to LP or vice versa) or outside of their broader category as significance (ie, significant reclassifications from B/LB or VUS or P/LP, from P/LP to VUS or B/LB, or from VUS to any other category). RESULTS: Of the 8075 unique variants included in this study, 23.7% (1912) of variants were reassessed, and 7.2% (578) of variants were reclassified. Of these, 351 (60.7%) variants were reclassified outside of their broader category of significance. Overall, the final classification was significantly different for 336 (58.1%) variants. Importantly, most reclassified variants were downgraded to a more benign classification (n=245; 72.9%). Of note, most reclassified VUS was downgraded to B/LB (n=233; 84.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood for reclassification of variants on reassessment is high. Most reclassified variants were downgraded to a more benign classification. Our findings highlight the importance of periodic variant reassessment to ensure timely and appropriate care for patients and their families.

Canadian COVID-19 host genetics cohort replicates known severity associations.

The HostSeq initiative recruited 10,059 Canadians infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March 2020 and March 2023, obtained clinical information on their disease experience and whole genome sequenced (WGS) their DNA. We analyzed the WGS data for genetic contributors to severe COVID-19 (considering 3,499 hospitalized cases and 4,975 non-hospitalized after quality control). We investigated the evidence for replication of loci reported by the International Host Genetics Initiative (HGI); analyzed the X chromosome; conducted rare variant gene-based analysis and polygenic risk score testing. Population stratification was adjusted for using meta-analysis across ancestry groups. We replicated two loci identified by the HGI for COVID-19 severity: the LZTFL1/SLC6A20 locus on chromosome 3 and the FOXP4 locus on chromosome 6 (the latter with a variant significant at P < 5E-8). We found novel significant associations with MRAS and WDR89 in gene-based analyses, and constructed a polygenic risk score that explained 1.01% of the variance in severe COVID-19. This study provides independent evidence confirming the robustness of previously identified COVID-19 severity loci by the HGI and identifies novel genes for further investigation.

COVID-19 vaccine reactogenicity among participants enrolled in the GENCOV study.

BACKGROUND: GENCOV is a prospective, observational cohort study of COVID-19-positive adults. Here, we characterize and compare side effects between COVID-19 vaccines and determine whether reactogenicity is exacerbated by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Participants were recruited across Ontario, Canada. Participant-reported demographic and COVID-19 vaccination data were collected using a questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess whether vaccine manufacturer, type, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection are associated with reactogenicity. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from n = 554 participants. Tiredness and localized side effects were the most common reactions across vaccine doses. For most participants, side effects occurred and subsided within 1-2 days. Recipients of Moderna mRNA and AstraZeneca vector vaccines reported reactions more frequently compared to recipients of a Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was independently associated with developing side effects. CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence of relatively mild and short-lived reactions reported by participants who have received approved COVID-19 vaccines.

Validation of low-pass genome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: Chromosomal microarray (CMA), while considered the gold standard for detecting copy number variants (CNVs) in prenatal diagnostics, has its limitations, including the necessity to replace aging microarray equipment, low throughput, a static design, and an inefficient multi-day workflow. This study evaluates the feasibility of low-pass genome sequencing (LP-GS) as a potential replacement for CMA in prenatal diagnostics. METHODS: We comprehensively compared LP-GS at 10x and 5x average depths with CMA in a prenatal laboratory. We examined parameters, including concordance, sensitivity, specificity, workflow efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We found a high degree of agreement between LP-GS and CMA for detecting CNVs and absence of heterozygosity. Furthermore, compared to CMA, LP-GS increased workflow efficiency and proved to be cost-neutral at 10x and cost-effective at 5x. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that LP-GS is a promising alternative to CMA in prenatal diagnostics, offering advantages, including a more efficient workflow and scalability for larger testing volumes. Importantly, for clinical laboratories that have adopted next-generation sequencing in a separate capacity, LP-GS facilitates a unified NGS-centric approach, enabling workflow consolidation. By offering a single, streamlined platform for detecting a broad range of genetic variants, LP-GS may represent a critical step toward enhancing the diagnostic capabilities of prenatal laboratories.

Applications of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing: impact of test performance, sample matrices, and patient characteristics.

Laboratory testing has been a key tool in managing the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic. While rapid antigen and PCR testing has proven useful for diagnosing acute SARS-CoV-2 infections, additional testing methods are required to understand the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections on immune response. Serological testing, a well-documented laboratory practice, measures the presence of antibodies in a sample to uncover information about host immunity. Although proposed applications of serological testing for clinical use have previously been limited, current research into SARS-CoV-2 has shown growing utility for serological methods in these settings. To name a few, serological testing has been used to identify patients with past infections and long-term active disease and to monitor vaccine efficacy. Test utility and result interpretation, however, are often complicated by factors that include poor test sensitivity early in infection, lack of immune response in some individuals, overlying infection and vaccination responses, lack of standardization of antibody titers/levels between instruments, unknown titers that confer immune protection, and large between-individual biological variation following infection or vaccination. Thus, the three major components of this review will examine (1) factors that affect serological test utility: test performance, testing matrices, seroprevalence concerns and viral variants, (2) patient factors that affect serological response: timing of sampling, age, sex, body mass index, immunosuppression and vaccination, and (3) informative applications of serological testing: identifying past infection, immune surveillance to guide health practices, and examination of protective immunity. SARS-CoV-2 serological testing should be beneficial for clinical care if it is implemented appropriately. However, as with other laboratory developed tests, use of SARS-CoV-2 serology as a testing modality warrants careful consideration of testing limitations and evaluation of its clinical utility.

Recontact to return new or updated PALB2 genetic results in the clinical laboratory setting.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to recontact individuals with clinically actionable test results identified through a retrospective research study and to provide a framework for laboratories to recontact patients. METHODS: Genetic testing was conducted on 2977 individuals originally referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 hereditary breast and ovarian cancer testing that had a negative genetic test result. A gene panel was used to identify pathogenic variants in known or newly discovered genes that could explain the underlying cause of disease; however, analysis was restricted to PALB2 for the purposes of this study. A patient recontact decision tree was developed to assist in the returning of updated genetic test results to clinics and patients. RESULTS: Novel clinically actionable pathogenic variants were identified in the PALB2 gene in 18 participants (0.6%), the majority of whom were recontacted with their new or updated genetic test results. Eight individuals were unable to be recontacted; five individuals had already learnt about their new or updated findings from genetic testing outside the context of this study; three individuals prompted cascade testing in family members; two individuals were deceased. CONCLUSION: Novel pathogenic variants in PALB2 were identified in 18 individuals through retrospective gene panel testing. Recontacting these individuals regarding these new or updated findings had a range of outcomes. The process of conveying genomic results within this framework can be effectively accomplished while upholding patient autonomy, potentially leading to advantageous outcomes for patients and their families.

The Deceased, Public Health, and Research: Proposing Legal Reforms.

There is little guidance concerning biomedical research using tissues from deceased individuals. Unique ethical and legal challenges gained visibility during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, when important studies using genome sequencing required access to biological materials from deceased individuals. These studies proposed to determine whether specific genomic profiles were associated with important disease outcomes. Such research has previously required consent from next-of-kin or other surrogate decision makers. Ethics waivers for such consent vary within Canada. In Ontario, research ethics boards can grant waivers of consent if the Tri-Council Policy Statement-2 conditions are met. These include that the individual is not harmed, that the materials are essential to the research, and that privacy will be protected. Conversely, in Quebec, Civil Code article 22 imposes an obligation on researchers to seek consent from next-of-kin or another surrogate decision maker with no option for waivers. It became evident to researchers that these standards can sometimes impose an impracticable balance of risks and benefits, especially in public health emergencies. We seek to establish why and when consent requirements should be waived for public health and research involving the tissues of deceased individuals.

Certain heterozygous variants in the kinase domain of the serine/threonine kinase NEK8 can cause an autosomal dominant form of polycystic kidney disease.

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) resulting from pathogenic variants in PKD1 and PKD2 is the most common form of PKD, but other genetic causes tied to primary cilia function have been identified. Biallelic pathogenic variants in the serine/threonine kinase NEK8 cause a syndromic ciliopathy with extra-kidney manifestations. Here we identify NEK8 as a disease gene for ADPKD in 12 families. Clinical evaluation was combined with functional studies using fibroblasts and tubuloids from affected individuals. Nek8 knockout mouse kidney epithelial (IMCD3) cells transfected with wild type or variant NEK8 were further used to study ciliogenesis, ciliary trafficking, kinase function, and DNA damage responses. Twenty-one affected monoallelic individuals uniformly exhibited cystic kidney disease (mostly neonatal) without consistent extra-kidney manifestations. Recurrent de novo mutations of the NEK8 missense variant p.Arg45Trp, including mosaicism, were seen in ten families. Missense variants elsewhere within the kinase domain (p.Ile150Met and p.Lys157Gln) were also identified. Functional studies demonstrated normal localization of the NEK8 protein to the proximal cilium and no consistent cilia formation defects in patient-derived cells. NEK8-wild type protein and all variant forms of the protein expressed in Nek8 knockout IMCD3 cells were localized to cilia and supported ciliogenesis. However, Nek8 knockout IMCD3 cells expressing NEK8-p.Arg45Trp and NEK8-p.Lys157Gln showed significantly decreased polycystin-2 but normal ANKS6 localization in cilia. Moreover, p.Arg45Trp NEK8 exhibited reduced kinase activity in vitro. In patient derived tubuloids and IMCD3 cells expressing NEK8-p.Arg45Trp, DNA damage signaling was increased compared to healthy passage-matched controls. Thus, we propose a dominant-negative effect for specific heterozygous missense variants in the NEK8 kinase domain as a new cause of PKD.

Characterizing Risk Factors for Hospitalization and Clinical Characteristics in a Cohort of COVID-19 Patients Enrolled in the GENCOV Study.

The GENCOV study aims to identify patient factors which affect COVID-19 severity and outcomes. Here, we aimed to evaluate patient characteristics, acute symptoms and their persistence, and associations with hospitalization. Participants were recruited at hospital sites across the Greater Toronto Area in Ontario, Canada. Patient-reported demographics, medical history, and COVID-19 symptoms and complications were collected through an intake survey. Regression analyses were performed to identify associations with outcomes including hospitalization and COVID-19 symptoms. In total, 966 responses were obtained from 1106 eligible participants (87% response rate) between November 2020 and May 2022. Increasing continuous age (aOR: 1.05 [95%CI: 1.01-1.08]) and BMI (aOR: 1.17 [95%CI: 1.10-1.24]), non-White/European ethnicity (aOR: 2.72 [95%CI: 1.22-6.05]), hypertension (aOR: 2.78 [95%CI: 1.22-6.34]), and infection by viral variants (aOR: 5.43 [95%CI: 1.45-20.34]) were identified as risk factors for hospitalization. Several symptoms including shortness of breath and fever were found to be more common among inpatients and tended to persist for longer durations following acute illness. Sex, age, ethnicity, BMI, vaccination status, viral strain, and underlying health conditions were associated with developing and having persistent symptoms. By improving our understanding of risk factors for severe COVID-19, our findings may guide COVID-19 patient management strategies by enabling more efficient clinical decision making.

Public knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 serological and viral lineage laboratory testing and result interpretation: A GENCOV study cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Concepts related to SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing and result interpretation can be challenging to understand. A cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 positive adults residing in Ontario, Canada was conducted to explore how well people understand SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests and their associated results. DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants were recruited through fliers or by prospective recruitment of outpatients and hospitalized inpatients with COVID-19. Enrolled participants included consenting adults with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result. An 11-item questionnaire was developed by researchers, nurses, and physicians in the study team and was administered online between April 2021 to May 2022 upon enrolment into the study. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 940 of 1106 eligible participants (85% participation rate). Most respondents understood 1) that antibody results should not influence adherence to social distancing measures (n = 602/888, 68%), 2) asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection following test positivity (n = 698/888, 79%), 3) serological test sensitivity in relation to post-infection timeline (n = 540/891, 61%), and 4) limitations of experts' knowledge related to SARS-CoV-2 serology (n = 693/887, 78%). Conversely, respondents demonstrated challenges understanding 1) conflicting molecular and serological test results and their relationship with immune protection (n = 162/893, 18%) and 2) the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants on vaccine effectiveness (n = 235/891, 26%). Analysis of responses stratified by sociodemographic variables identified that respondents who were either: 1) female, 2) more educated, 3) aged 18-44, 4) from a high-income household, or 5) healthcare workers responded expectedly more often. CONCLUSIONS: We have highlighted concepts related to SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests and associated results which may be challenging to understand. The findings of this study enable us to identify 1) misconceptions related to various SARS-CoV-2 test results, 2) groups of individuals at risk, and 3) strategies to improve people's understanding of their test results.

Germline whole genome sequencing in adults with multiple primary tumors.

Multiple primary tumors (MPTs) are a harbinger of hereditary cancer syndromes. Affected individuals often fit genetic testing criteria for a number of hereditary cancer genes and undergo multigene panel testing. Other genomic testing options, such as whole exome (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are available, but the utility of these genomic approaches as a second-tier test for those with uninformative multigene panel testing has not been explored. Here, we report our germline sequencing results from WGS in 9 patients with MPTs who had non-informative multigene panel testing. Following germline WGS, sequence (agnostic or 735 selected genes) and copy number variant (CNV) analysis was performed according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) standards and guidelines for interpreting sequence variants and reporting CNVs. In this cohort, WGS, as a second-tier test, did not identify additional pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. Although we identified a CHEK2 likely pathogenic variant and a MUTYH pathogenic variant, both were previously identified in the multigene panels and were not explanatory for the presented type of tumors. CNV analysis also failed to identify any pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. In summary, after multigene panel testing, WGS did not reveal any additional pathogenic variants in patients with MPTs. Our study, based on a small cohort of patients with MPT, suggests that germline gene panel testing may be sufficient to investigate these cases. Future studies with larger sample sizes may further elucidate the additional utility of WGS in MPTs.

A model for the return and referral of all clinically significant secondary findings of genomic sequencing.

Secondary findings (SFs) identified through genomic sequencing (GS) can offer a wide range of health benefits to patients. Resource and capacity constraints pose a challenge to their clinical management; therefore, clinical workflows are needed to optimise the health benefits of SFs. In this paper, we describe a model we created for the return and referral of all clinically significant SFs, beyond medically actionable results, from GS. As part of a randomised controlled trial evaluating the outcomes and costs of disclosing all clinically significant SFs from GS, we consulted genetics and primary care experts to determine a feasible workflow to manage SFs. Consensus was sought to determine appropriate clinical recommendations for each category of SF and which clinician specialist would provide follow-up care. We developed a communication and referral plan for each category of SFs. This involved referrals to specialised clinics, such as an Adult Genetics clinic, for highly penetrant medically actionable findings. Common and non-urgent SFs, such as pharmacogenomics and carrier status results for non-family planning participants, were directed back to the family physician (FP). SF results and recommendations were communicated directly to participants to respect autonomy and to their FPs to support follow-up of SFs. We describe a model for the return and referral of all clinically significant SFs to facilitate the utility of GS and promote the health benefits of SFs. This may serve as a model for others returning GS results transitioning participants from research to clinical settings.

HLA Variation and SARS-CoV-2 Specific Antibody Response.

Differences in SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses have been observed between individuals following natural infection or vaccination. In addition to already known factors, such as age, sex, COVID-19 severity, comorbidity, vaccination status, hybrid immunity, and duration of infection, inter-individual variations in SARS-CoV-2 immune responses may, in part, be explained by structural differences brought about by genetic variation in the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules responsible for the presentation of SARS-CoV-2 antigens to T effector cells. While dendritic cells present peptides with HLA class I molecules to CD8+ T cells to induce cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses (CTLs), they present peptides with HLA class II molecules to T follicular helper cells to induce B cell differentiation followed by memory B cell and plasma cell maturation. Plasma cells then produce SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Here, we review published data linking HLA genetic variation or polymorphisms with differences in SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses. While there is evidence that heterogeneity in antibody response might be related to HLA variation, there are conflicting findings due in part to differences in study designs. We provide insight into why more research is needed in this area. Elucidating the genetic basis of variability in the SARS-CoV-2 immune response will help to optimize diagnostic tools and lead to the development of new vaccines and therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious diseases.

Great expectations: patients' preferences for clinically significant results from genomic sequencing.

We aimed to describe patient preferences for a broad range of secondary findings (SF) from genomic sequencing (GS) and factors driving preferences. We assessed preference data within a trial of the Genomics ADvISER, (SF decision aid) among adult cancer patients. Participants could choose from five categories of SF: (1) medically actionable; (2) polygenic risks; (3) rare diseases; (4) early-onset neurological diseases; and (5) carrier status. We analyzed preferences using descriptive statistics and drivers of preferences using multivariable logistic regression models. The 133 participants were predominantly European (74%) or East Asian or mixed ancestry (13%), female (90%), and aged > 50 years old (60%). The majority chose to receive SF. 97% (129/133) chose actionable findings with 36% (48/133) choosing all 5 categories. Despite the lack of medical actionability, participants were interested in receiving SF of polygenic risks (74%), carrier status (75%), rare diseases (59%), and early-onset neurologic diseases (53%). Older participants were more likely to be interested in receiving results for early-onset neurological diseases, while those exhibiting lower decisional conflict were more likely to select all categories. Our results highlight a disconnect between cancer patient preferences and professional guidelines on SF, such as ACMG's recommendations to only return medically actionable secondary findings. In addition to clinical evidence, future guidelines should incorporate patient preferences.

How do members of the public expect to use variants of uncertain significance in their health care? A population-based survey.

PURPOSE: Genomic sequencing can generate complex results, including variants of uncertain significance (VUS). In general, VUS should not inform clinical decision-making. This study aimed to assess the public's expected management of VUS. METHODS: An online, hypothetical survey was conducted among members of the Canadian public preceded by an educational video. Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 arms, VUS or pathogenic variant in a colorectal cancer gene, and asked which types of health services they expected to use for this result. Expected health service use was compared between randomization arms, and associations between participants' sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes, and medical history were explored. RESULTS: Among 1003 respondents (completion rate 60%), more participants expected to use each type of health service for a pathogenic variant than for a VUS. However, a considerable proportion of participants expected to request monitoring (73.4%) and consult health care providers (60.9%) for a VUS. There was evidence to support associations between expectation to use health services for a VUS with family history of genetic disease, family history of cancer, education, and attitudes toward health care and technology. CONCLUSION: Many participants expected to use health services for a VUS in a colorectal cancer predisposition gene, suggesting a potential disconnect between patients' expectations for VUS management and guideline-recommended care.

Improving RNA Fusion Call Confidence and Reliability in Molecular Diagnostic Testing.

Next-generation sequencing is a superior method for detecting known and novel RNA fusions in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue over fluorescence in situ hybridization and RT-PCR. However, confidence in fusion calling and true negatives may be compromised by poor RNA quality. Using a commercial panel of 507 genes and the recommended 3-million read threshold to accept results, two cases yielded false negatives while exceeding this recommendation during clinical validation. To develop a reliable quality control metric that better reflects internal sample quality and improves call confidence, gene expression across 361 patient tumor samples was evaluated to derive a set of 15 genes to serve as a proxy quality control (pQC). These 15 genes were assessed for their normalized expression using the sequencing data from each case and selected for robustness. A threshold of 11 pQC genes produced a 4.71% fail rate, selected for stringency as an acceptable level of repeated testing in the clinical setting, minimizing false-negative calls. To increase the chance that low-quality samples pass pQC, a revision to the library preparation method was also tested, with 75% of previously failed samples passing pQC on resequencing by increasing cDNA input. Taken together, a next-generation sequencing analysis quality control tool is presented that serves as a surrogate for housekeeping genes and improves confidence in fusion calls.

Genetic testing women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: What criteria are the most predictive of a positive test?

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of pathogenic variants in cancer-predisposing genes is important when making breast cancer treatment decisions, but genetic testing is not universal and criteria must be met to qualify for genetic testing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pathogenic variant yield for nine cancer predisposition genes by testing criteria, singly and in combination. METHODS: Women diagnosed with breast cancer between June 2013 and May 2018 were recruited from four centers in Toronto, Canada. Participants completed a demographics and family history questionnaire and clinical characteristics were collected from medical charts. Genetic testing was done for BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, BRIP1, RAD51D, RECQL, and TP53. Pathogenic variant frequencies were calculated according to five criteria (age ≤ 50, triple-negative breast cancer, family history, bilateral breast cancer, or Jewish ethnicity). RESULTS: Of the 1006 women studied, 100 women (9.9%) were found to have a pathogenic variant in one of the nine genes tested. The highest prevalence of pathogenic variants was found in women with triple-negative breast cancer (23%). Of the 100 pathogenic variants detected, 78 were detected in women diagnosed at age 50 or less. A total of 96% of the mutations were identified with three criteria (age of diagnosis, family history, and triple-negative status). CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing criteria for women with breast cancer should include women with triple-negative breast cancer, regardless of age. All women aged 50 years or below at time of breast cancer diagnosis should be offered genetic testing.

Genome screening, reporting, and genetic counseling for healthy populations.

Rapid advancements of genome sequencing (GS) technologies have enhanced our understanding of the relationship between genes and human disease. To incorporate genomic information into the practice of medicine, new processes for the analysis, reporting, and communication of GS data are needed. Blood samples were collected from adults with a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) diagnosis (target N = 1500). GS was performed. Data were filtered and analyzed using custom pipelines and gene panels. We developed unique patient-facing materials, including an online intake survey, group counseling presentation, and consultation letters in addition to a comprehensive GS report. The final report includes results generated from GS data: (1) monogenic disease risks; (2) carrier status; (3) pharmacogenomic variants; (4) polygenic risk scores for common conditions; (5) HLA genotype; (6) genetic ancestry; (7) blood group; and, (8) COVID-19 viral lineage. Participants complete pre-test genetic counseling and confirm preferences for secondary findings before receiving results. Counseling and referrals are initiated for clinically significant findings. We developed a genetic counseling, reporting, and return of results framework that integrates GS information across multiple areas of human health, presenting possibilities for the clinical application of comprehensive GS data in healthy individuals.

Unique Capabilities of Genome Sequencing for Rare Disease Diagnosis.

Background: Causal variants underlying rare disorders may remain elusive even after expansive gene panels or exome sequencing (ES). Clinicians and researchers may then turn to genome sequencing (GS), though the added value of this technique and its optimal use remain poorly defined. We therefore investigated the advantages of GS within a phenotypically diverse cohort. Methods: GS was performed for 744 individuals with rare disease who were genetically undiagnosed. Analysis included review of single nucleotide, indel, structural, and mitochondrial variants. Results: We successfully solved 218/744 (29.3%) cases using GS, with most solves involving established disease genes (157/218, 72.0%). Of all solved cases, 148 (67.9%) had previously had non-diagnostic ES. We systematically evaluated the 218 causal variants for features requiring GS to identify and 61/218 (28.0%) met these criteria, representing 8.2% of the entire cohort. These included small structural variants (13), copy neutral inversions and complex rearrangements (8), tandem repeat expansions (6), deep intronic variants (15), and coding variants that may be more easily found using GS related to uniformity of coverage (19). Conclusion: We describe the diagnostic yield of GS in a large and diverse cohort, illustrating several types of pathogenic variation eluding ES or other techniques. Our results reveal a higher diagnostic yield of GS, supporting the utility of a genome-first approach, with consideration of GS as a secondary or tertiary test when higher-resolution structural variant analysis is needed or there is a strong clinical suspicion for a condition and prior targeted genetic testing has been negative.

Genome Reporting for Healthy Populations-Pipeline for Genomic Screening from the GENCOV COVID-19 Study.

Genome sequencing holds the promise for great public health benefits. It is currently being used in the context of rare disease diagnosis and novel gene identification, but also has the potential to identify genetic disease risk factors in healthy individuals. Genome sequencing technologies are currently being used to identify genetic factors that may influence variability in symptom severity and immune response among patients infected by SARS-CoV-2. The GENCOV study aims to look at the relationship between genetic, serological, and biochemical factors and variability of SARS-CoV-2 symptom severity, and to evaluate the utility of returning genome screening results to study participants. Study participants select which results they wish to receive with a decision aid. Medically actionable information for diagnosis, disease risk estimation, disease prevention, and patient management are provided in a comprehensive genome report. Using a combination of bioinformatics software and custom tools, this article describes a pipeline for the analysis and reporting of genetic results to individuals with COVID-19, including HLA genotyping, large-scale continental ancestry estimation, and pharmacogenomic analysis to determine metabolizer status and drug response. In addition, this pipeline includes reporting of medically actionable conditions from comprehensive gene panels for Cardiology, Neurology, Metabolism, Hereditary Cancer, and Hereditary Kidney, and carrier screening for reproductive planning. Incorporated into the genome report are polygenic risk scores for six diseases-coronary artery disease; atrial fibrillation; type-2 diabetes; and breast, prostate, and colon cancer-as well as blood group genotyping analysis for ABO and Rh blood types and genotyping for other antigens of clinical relevance. The genome report summarizes the findings of these analyses in a way that extensively communicates clinically relevant results to patients and their physicians. © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: HLA genotyping and disease association Basic Protocol 2: Large-scale continental ancestry estimation Basic Protocol 3: Dosage recommendations for pharmacogenomic gene variants associated with drug response Support Protocol: System setup.