| Literature DB >> 21920049 |
Christian Gilissen1, Alexander Hoischen, Han G Brunner, Joris A Veltman.
Abstract
Exome sequencing is revolutionizing Mendelian disease gene identification. This results in improved clinical diagnosis, more accurate genotype-phenotype correlations and new insights into the role of rare genomic variation in disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21920049 PMCID: PMC3308044 DOI: 10.1186/gb-2011-12-9-228
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Figure 1A timeline illustrating technological breakthroughs and hallmark publications for Mendelian disease gene identification. (a) The main historical events leading up to the introduction of whole exome sequencing (WES). The vast majority of all Mendelian disease genes known so far have been identified using conventional methods, including linkage analysis [6,57-59], homozygosity mapping [7], karyotyping [60] and copy number variation (CNV) detection [8,61,62]. Many studies following the initial descriptions have been based on technical achievements, such as the first human linkage map [63] or the first draft of the human genome [11,64]. The next generation sequencing (NGS) era was accelerated by the first commercial release of an NGS instrument [65], and using the same technology the first individual human genome was sequenced by NGS [66]. (b) The main exome sequencing events and landmark publications. More than 30 Mendelian disease genes have been identified by exome sequencing so far. Exome sequencing is now the tool of choice for Mendelian disease gene identification, starting with the proof of concept [67] and identification of the first recessive [14] and dominant disease genes [29]. It has been shown that linkage and homozygosity information can be retrieved directly from exome sequencing data, allowing the application for traditional mapping approaches [53,68]. Abbreviations: ID, intellectual disability; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism; STS, sequence-tagged site; WGS, whole genome sequencing.
Mendelian disease gene identification approaches
| Approach | Applies to | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Candidate gene | Any disease | Easy to perform for one or two genes; requires no mapping, can directly identify the causative variant/mutation | Relies heavily on current biological knowledge; success rate very low |
| Genetic mapping by karyotyping | Any disease | Easy to perform; no familial cases required; can detect (large) balanced events | Low resolution, only detects large chromosomal aberrations; mutation detection requires second step |
| Genetic mapping by linkage analysis | Inherited disease | Easy to perform | Requires large families, often identifies large loci; mutation detection requires second step |
| Genetic mapping by homozygosity mapping | Recessive monogenic diseases | Small families can be used | Most useful for consanguineous families; often identifies large loci; mutation detection requires second step |
| Genetic mapping by CNV analysis | Monogenic/monolocus disease | High resolution CNV screening; no familial cases required; can potentially identify small loci | Only investigates CNVs; cannot detect balanced events, no base-pair resolution; mutation detection requires second step |
| Whole exome sequencing (WES) | Any disease | Base-pair resolution exome-wide; detects most types of genomic variation; can directly identify the causative variant/mutation | Unable to detect non-coding variants; limited resolution for CNVs and other structural variation; coverage variability due to enrichment process; relatively expensive |
| Whole genome sequencing (WGS) | Any disease | Base-pair resolution genome-wide; detects all types of genomic variation; can directly identify the causative variant/mutation | Data analysis complex; even more expensive than exome sequencing |
Mendelian disease gene identifications by exome or genome sequencing
| Disorder | Inheritance | Gene identified | Scope | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Congenital chloride diarrhea | Recessive | Exome | Choi | |
| Miller syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Ng | |
| Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy | Recessive | Genome | Lupski | |
| Metachondromatosis | Dominant | Genome | Sobreira | |
| Schinzel-Giedion syndrome | Dominant | Exome | Hoischen | |
| Nonsyndromic hearing loss | Recessive | Exome | Walsh | |
| Perrault syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Pierce | |
| Hyperphosphatasia mental retardation syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Krawitz | |
| Sensenbrenner syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Gilissen | |
| Cerebral cortical malformations | Recessive | Exome | Bilguvar | |
| Kaposi sarcoma | Recessive | Exome | Byun | |
| Spinocerebellar ataxia | Dominant | Exome | Wang | |
| Combined hypolipidemia | Recessive | Exome | Musunuru | |
| Complex I deficiency | Recessive | Exome | Haack | |
| Autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Bolze | |
| Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis | Dominant | Exome | Johnson | |
| Nonsyndromic mental retardation | Dominant | Various | Exome | Vissers |
| Kabuki syndrome | Dominant | Exome | Ng | |
| Inflammatory bowel disease | Dominant | Exome | Worthey | |
| Nonsyndromic mental retardation | Recessive | Exome | Caliskan | |
| Retinitis pigmentosa | Recessive | Exome | Züchner | |
| Osteogenesis imperfecta | Recessive | Exome | Becker | |
| Dilated cardiomyopathy | Dominant | Exome | Norton | |
| Hajdu-Cheney syndrome | Dominant | Exome | Simpson | |
| Hajdu-Cheney syndrome | Dominant | Exome | Isidor | |
| Skeletal dysplasia | Recessive | Exome | Glazov | |
| Amelogenesis | Recessive | Exome | O'Sullivan | |
| Chondrodysplasia and abnormal joint development | Recessive | Exome | Vissers | |
| Progeroid syndrome | Recessive | Exome | Puente | |
| Infantile mitochondrial cardiomyopathy | Recessive | Exome | Götz | |
| Sensory neuropathy with dementia and hearing loss | Dominant | Exome | Klein | |
| Autism | Dominant | Various | Exome | O'Roak |
Figure 2A representation of the relationship between the size of the mutational target and the frequency of disease for disorders caused by . Dashed lines separate different sizes of mutational target. Rounded rectangles represent examples of genes. Disease frequency categories range from extremely rare disorders (that is, only a few cases described) to disorders that occur more commonly within the population (such as intellectual disability, which has a frequency in the general population of more than 1%). Underneath each of these categories an example disorder is given. The lower part shows some of the implicated disease gene(s), ranging from a specific domain in a single gene, to single gene disorders, to multiple gene disorders, to disorders with extreme genetic heterogeneity. From left to right: SET binding protein 1 (SETBP1); dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH); NADH dehydrogenase (ubiquinone) Fe-S protein 1 (NDUFS1); acyl-CoA dehydrogenase family, member 9 (ACAD9); jumonji, AT rich interactive domain 1C (JARID1C); capicua homolog (CIC); deformed epidermal autoregulatory factor 1 (DEAF1); YY1 transcription factor (YY1); dynein, cytoplasmic 1, heavy chain 1 (DYNC1H1); member RAS oncogene family (RAB39B); synaptic Ras GTPase activating protein 1 (SYNGAP1).