Recommendations for Next-Generation Sequencing Germline Variant Confirmation: A Joint Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology and National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Clinical laboratory implementation of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based constitutional genetic testing has been rapid and widespread. In the absence of widely adopted comprehensive guidance, there remains substantial variability among laboratories in the practice of NGS. One issue of sustained discussion in the field is whether and to what extent orthogonal confirmation of genetic variants identified by NGS is necessary or helpful. The Association for Molecular Pathology Clinical Practice Committee convened the NGS Germline Variant Confirmation Working Group to assess current evidence regarding orthogonal confirmation and to establish recommendations for standardizing orthogonal confirmation practices to support quality patient care. On the basis of the results of a survey of the literature, a survey of laboratory practices, and subject expert matter consensus, eight recommendations are presented, providing a common framework for clinical laboratory professionals to develop or refine individualized laboratory policies and procedures regarding orthogonal confirmation of germline variants detected by NGS.

Diagnostic testing laboratories are valuable partners for disease gene discovery: 5-year experience with GeneMatcher.

Although the rates of disease gene discovery have steadily increased with the expanding use of genome and exome sequencing by clinical and research laboratories, only ~16% of genes in the genome have confirmed disease associations. Here we describe our clinical laboratory's experience utilizing GeneMatcher, an online portal designed to promote disease gene discovery and data sharing. Since 2016, we submitted 246 candidates from 243 unique genes to GeneMatcher, of which 111 (45%) are now clinically characterized. Submissions meeting our candidate gene-reporting criteria based on a scoring system using patient and molecular-weighted evidence were significantly more likely to be characterized as of October 2021 versus genes that did not meet our clinical-reporting criteria (p = 0.025). We reported relevant findings related to these newly characterized gene-disease associations in 477 probands. In 218 (46%) instances, we issued reclassifications after an initial negative or candidate gene (uncertain) report. We coauthored 104 publications delineating gene-disease relationships, including descriptions of new associations (60%), additional supportive evidence (13%), subsequent descriptive cohorts (23%), and phenotypic expansions (4%). Clinical laboratories are pivotal for disease gene discovery efforts and can screen phenotypes based on genotype matches, contact clinicians of relevant cases, and issue proactive reclassification reports.

Facing the challenge of genetic counselors' need for rapid continuing education about genomic technologies.

The last couple of decades have seen the rapid advancement of genomic technologies (GT) and their equally rapid adoption into clinical testing. Regardless of specialty, all genetic counselors are unified by the fundamental goal to aid in diagnosing patient's genetic disease underscoring the importance for genetic counselors to maintain an in-depth understanding of GT. The National Society of Genetic Counselors' (NSGC) GT Special Interest Group conducted an online survey of NSGC members to assess current genomic technologies knowledge gaps. A total of 171 individuals from a variety of primary work settings completed the survey sufficiently to be included in the analysis. The majority of respondents received their degree in genetic counseling in more recent years (2000-2015). On average across all technologies, >70% of respondents deemed knowledge of GTs as important for successful job performance, 55% responded that additional job training in GTs is needed to successfully perform job functions, and only 28% responded that graduate training in GTs was good. Overall, the data show that participating genetic counselors perceive that their knowledge of GTs is inadequate while it is a key component of their jobs. These results have implications both for training programs and for continuing education efforts. These data can be used as a starting point for additional research into GT educational needs of genetic counselors.

When moments matter: Finding answers with rapid exome sequencing.

BACKGROUND: When time is of the essence in critical care cases, a fast molecular diagnosis is often necessary to help health care providers quickly determine best next steps for treatments, prognosis, and counseling of their patients. In this paper, we present the diagnostic rates and improved quality of life for patients undergoing clinical rapid exome sequencing. METHODS: The clinical histories and results of 41 patients undergoing rapid exome sequencing were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Clinical rapid exome sequencing identified a definitive diagnosis in 13/41 (31.7%) and other relevant findings in 17 of the patients (41.5%). The average time to verbal report was 7 days; to written report was 11 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations demonstrate the utility and effectiveness of rapid family-based diagnostic exome sequencing in improving patients care.

Detection of structural variation using target captured next-generation sequencing data for genetic diagnostic testing.

PURPOSE: Structural variation (SV) is associated with inherited diseases. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is an efficient method for SV detection because of its high-throughput, low cost, and base-pair resolution. However, due to lack of standard NGS protocols and a limited number of clinical samples with pathogenic SVs, comprehensive standards for SV detection, interpretation, and reporting are to be established. METHODS: We performed SV assessment on 60,000 clinical samples tested with hereditary cancer NGS panels spanning 48 genes. To evaluate NGS results, NGS and orthogonal methods were used separately in a blinded fashion for SV detection in all samples. RESULTS: A total of 1,037 SVs in coding sequence (CDS) or untranslated regions (UTRs) and 30,847 SVs in introns were detected and validated. Across all variant types, NGS shows 100% sensitivity and 99.9% specificity. Overall, 64% of CDS/UTR SVs were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic, and five deletions/duplications were reclassified as pathogenic using breakpoint information from NGS. CONCLUSION: The SVs presented here can be used as a valuable resource for clinical research and diagnostics. The data illustrate NGS as a powerful tool for SV detection. Application of NGS and confirmation technologies in genetic testing ensures delivering accurate and reliable results for diagnosis and patient care.

Clinical whole-exome sequencing results impact medical management.

BACKGROUND: Clinical diagnostic whole-exome sequencing (WES) is a powerful tool for patients with undiagnosed genetic disorders. To demonstrate the clinical utility, we surveyed healthcare providers (HCP) about changes in medical management and treatment, diagnostic testing, reproductive planning, and use of educational services subsequent to WES testing. METHODS: For a period of 18 months, an 18-question survey was sent to HCPs attached to the WES reports. We analyzed the molecular diagnosis, patient clinical features, and the medical management changes reported in the returned surveys. RESULTS: A total of 62 (2.2% of 2,876) surveys were returned, consisting of 37.1% patients with a positive or likely positive pathogenic alteration, 51.6% negative results, 9.7% uncertain findings, and 1 patient (1.6%) with a novel candidate finding. Overall, 100% of the HCPs of patients with positive or likely positive WES results (n = 23) and HCPs of patients with uncertain WES results (n = 6) responded positively to one of the 18 queries. Of note, 37.5% of the HCPs of patients with negative WES results (n = 32) responded positively to at least one query. CONCLUSION: Overall, these data clearly demonstrate the clinical utility of WES by demonstrating the impact on medical management irrespective of the exome result.

Exome sequencing in neonates: diagnostic rates, characteristics, and time to diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Neonatal patients are particularly appropriate for utilization of diagnostic exome sequencing (DES), as many Mendelian diseases are known to present in this period of life but often with complex, heterogeneous features. We attempted to determine the diagnostic rates and features of neonatal patients undergoing DES. METHODS: The clinical histories and results of 66 neonatal patients undergoing DES were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Clinical DES identified potentially relevant findings in 25 patients (37.9%). The majority of patients had structural anomalies such as birth defects, dysmorphic features, cardiac, craniofacial, and skeletal defects. The average time for clinical rapid testing was 8 days. CONCLUSION: Our observations demonstrate the utility of family-based exome sequencing in neonatal patients, including familial cosegregation analysis and comprehensive medical review.

Correction: Candidate-gene criteria for clinical reporting: diagnostic exome sequencing identifies altered candidate genes among 8% of patients with undiagnosed diseases.

In the published version of this paper, some of the columns in the last three rows of Table 3 were mistakenly transposed. The corrected table appears below. In col. 6 of the row for DNMT3A, "S3" was published in the original article. However, in the revised table for the corrigendum, it has been corrected to "S1". In col. 6 of the row for SON, "S3" was published in the original article. However, in the revised table for the corrigendum, it has been corrected to "S2".

Outcomes of Diagnostic Exome Sequencing in Patients With Diagnosed or Suspected Autism Spectrum Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Exome sequencing has recently been proved to be a successful diagnostic method for complex neurodevelopmental disorders. However, the diagnostic yield of exome sequencing for autism spectrum disorders has not been extensively evaluated in large cohorts to date. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed diagnostic exome sequencing in a cohort of 163 individuals with autism spectrum disorder (66.3%) or autistic features (33.7%). RESULTS: The diagnostic yield observed in patients in our cohort was 25.8% (42 of 163) for positive or likely positive findings in characterized disease genes, while a candidate genetic etiology was reported for an additional 3.3% (4 of 120) of patients. Among the positive findings in the patients with autism spectrum disorder or autistic features, 61.9% were the result of de novo mutations. Patients presenting with psychiatric conditions or ataxia or paraplegia in addition to autism spectrum disorder or autistic features were significantly more likely to receive positive results compared with patients without these clinical features (95.6% vs 27.1%, P < 0.0001; 83.3% vs 21.2%, P < 0.0001, respectively). The majority of the positive findings were in recently identified autism spectrum disorder genes, supporting the importance of diagnostic exome sequencing for patients with autism spectrum disorder or autistic features as the causative genes might evade traditional sequential or panel testing. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that diagnostic exome sequencing would be an efficient primary diagnostic method for patients with autism spectrum disorders or autistic features. Moreover, our data may aid clinicians to better determine which subset of patients with autism spectrum disorder with additional clinical features would benefit the most from diagnostic exome sequencing.

Classification of Genes: Standardized Clinical Validity Assessment of Gene-Disease Associations Aids Diagnostic Exome Analysis and Reclassifications.

Ascertaining a diagnosis through exome sequencing can provide potential benefits to patients, insurance companies, and the healthcare system. Yet, as diagnostic sequencing is increasingly employed, vast amounts of human genetic data are produced that need careful curation. We discuss methods for accurately assessing the clinical validity of gene-disease relationships to interpret new research findings in a clinical context and increase the diagnostic rate. The specifics of a gene-disease scoring system adapted for use in a clinical laboratory are described. In turn, clinical validity scoring of gene-disease relationships can inform exome reporting for the identification of new or the upgrade of previous, clinically relevant gene findings. Our retrospective analysis of all reclassification reports from the first 4 years of diagnostic exome sequencing showed that 78% were due to new gene-disease discoveries published in the literature. Among all exome positive/likely positive findings in characterized genes, 32% were in genetic etiologies that were discovered after 2010. Our data underscore the importance and benefits of active and up-to-date curation of a gene-disease database combined with critical clinical validity scoring and proactive reanalysis in the clinical genomics era.

Candidate-gene criteria for clinical reporting: diagnostic exome sequencing identifies altered candidate genes among 8% of patients with undiagnosed diseases.

PURPOSE: Diagnostic exome sequencing (DES) is now a commonly ordered test for individuals with undiagnosed genetic disorders. In addition to providing a diagnosis for characterized diseases, exome sequencing has the capacity to uncover novel candidate genes for disease. METHODS: Family-based DES included analysis of both characterized and novel genetic etiologies. To evaluate candidate genes for disease in the clinical setting, we developed a systematic, rule-based classification schema. RESULTS: Testing identified a candidate gene among 7.7% (72/934) of patients referred for DES; 37 (4.0%) and 35 (3.7%) of the genes received evidence scores of "candidate" and "suspected candidate," respectively. A total of 71 independent candidate genes were reported among the 72 patients, and 38% (27/71) were subsequently corroborated in the peer-reviewed literature. This rate of corroboration increased to 51.9% (27/52) among patients whose gene was reported at least 12 months previously. CONCLUSIONS: Herein, we provide transparent, comprehensive, and standardized scoring criteria for the clinical reporting of candidate genes. These results demonstrate that DES is an integral tool for genetic diagnosis, especially for elucidating the molecular basis for both characterized and novel candidate genetic etiologies. Gene discoveries also advance the understanding of normal human biology and more common diseases.Genet Med 19 2, 224-235.

A survey of current practices for genomic sequencing test interpretation and reporting processes in US laboratories.

PURPOSE: While the diagnostic success of genomic sequencing expands, the complexity of this testing should not be overlooked. Numerous laboratory processes are required to support the identification, interpretation, and reporting of clinically significant variants. This study aimed to examine the workflow and reporting procedures among US laboratories to highlight shared practices and identify areas in need of standardization. METHODS: Surveys and follow-up interviews were conducted with laboratories offering exome and/or genome sequencing to support a research program or for routine clinical services. The 73-item survey elicited multiple choice and free-text responses that were later clarified with phone interviews. RESULTS: Twenty-one laboratories participated. Practices highly concordant across all groups included consent documentation, multiperson case review, and enabling patient opt-out of incidental or secondary findings analysis. Noted divergence included use of phenotypic data to inform case analysis and interpretation and reporting of case-specific quality metrics and methods. Few laboratory policies detailed procedures for data reanalysis, data sharing, or patient access to data. CONCLUSION: This study provides an overview of practices and policies of experienced exome and genome sequencing laboratories. The results enable broader consideration of which practices are becoming standard approaches, where divergence remains, and areas of development in best practice guidelines that may be helpful.Genet Med advance online publication 03 Novemeber 2016.

Diagnostic exome sequencing provides a molecular diagnosis for a significant proportion of patients with epilepsy.

PURPOSE: To assess the yield of diagnostic exome sequencing (DES) and to characterize the molecular findings in characterized and novel disease genes in patients with epilepsy. METHODS: In an unselected sample of 1,131 patients referred for DES, overall results were compared between patients with and without epilepsy. DES results were examined based on age of onset and epilepsy diagnosis. RESULTS: Positive/likely positive results were identified in 112/293 (38.2%) epilepsy patients compared with 210/732 (28.7%) patients without epilepsy (P = 0.004). The diagnostic yield in characterized disease genes among patients with epilepsy was 33.4% (105/314). KCNQ2, MECP2, FOXG1, IQSEC2, KMT2A, and STXBP1 were most commonly affected by de novo alterations. Patients with epileptic encephalopathies had the highest rate of positive findings (43.4%). A likely positive novel genetic etiology was proposed in 14/200 (7%) patients with epilepsy; this frequency was highest in patients with epileptic encephalopathies (17%). Three genes (COQ4, DNM1, and PURA) were initially reported as likely positive novel disease genes and were subsequently corroborated in independent peer-reviewed publications. CONCLUSION: DES with analysis and interpretation of both characterized and novel genetic etiologies is a useful diagnostic tool in epilepsy, particularly in severe early-onset epilepsy. The reporting on novel genetic etiologies may further increase the diagnostic yield.Genet Med 18 9, 898-905.