Alejandro Iglesias1, Kwame Anyane-Yeboa1, Julia Wynn2, Ashley Wilson3, Megan Truitt Cho3, Edwin Guzman3, Rebecca Sisson3, Claire Egan3, Wendy K Chung4. 1. Division of Clinical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. 2. Division of Molecular Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. 3. Division of Clinical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA. 4. 1] Division of Molecular Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA [2] Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reports of the use of whole-exome sequencing in clinical practice are limited. We report our experience with whole-exome sequencing in 115 patients in a single center and evaluate its feasibility and clinical usefulness in clinical care. METHODS: Whole-exome sequencing was utilized based on the judgment of three clinical geneticists. We describe age, gender, ethnicity, consanguinity, indication for testing, family history, insurance, laboratory results, clinician interpretation of results, and impact on patient care. RESULTS: Most patients were children (78.9%). The most common indications for testing were birth defects (24.3%) and developmental delay (25.2%). We identified four new candidate human disease genes and possibly expanded the disease phenotypes associated with five different genes. Establishing a diagnosis led to discontinuation of additional planned testing in all patients, screening for additional manifestations in eight, altered management in fourteen, novel therapy in two, identification of other familial mutation carriers in five, and reproductive planning in six. CONCLUSION: Our results show that whole-exome sequencing is feasible, has clinical usefulness, and allows timely medical interventions, informed reproductive choices, and avoidance of additional testing. Our results also suggest phenotype expansion and identification of new candidate disease genes that would have been impossible to diagnose by other targeted testing methods.
PURPOSE: Reports of the use of whole-exome sequencing in clinical practice are limited. We report our experience with whole-exome sequencing in 115 patients in a single center and evaluate its feasibility and clinical usefulness in clinical care. METHODS: Whole-exome sequencing was utilized based on the judgment of three clinical geneticists. We describe age, gender, ethnicity, consanguinity, indication for testing, family history, insurance, laboratory results, clinician interpretation of results, and impact on patient care. RESULTS: Most patients were children (78.9%). The most common indications for testing were birth defects (24.3%) and developmental delay (25.2%). We identified four new candidate human disease genes and possibly expanded the disease phenotypes associated with five different genes. Establishing a diagnosis led to discontinuation of additional planned testing in all patients, screening for additional manifestations in eight, altered management in fourteen, novel therapy in two, identification of other familial mutation carriers in five, and reproductive planning in six. CONCLUSION: Our results show that whole-exome sequencing is feasible, has clinical usefulness, and allows timely medical interventions, informed reproductive choices, and avoidance of additional testing. Our results also suggest phenotype expansion and identification of new candidate disease genes that would have been impossible to diagnose by other targeted testing methods.
Authors: P Cela; M Hampl; N A Shylo; K J Christopher; M Kavkova; M Landova; T Zikmund; S D Weatherbee; J Kaiser; M Buchtova Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 6.116
Authors: Tiong Yang Tan; Sebastian Lunke; Belinda Chong; Dean Phelan; Miriam Fanjul-Fernandez; Justine E Marum; Vanessa Siva Kumar; Zornitza Stark; Alison Yeung; Natasha J Brown; Chloe Stutterd; Martin B Delatycki; Simon Sadedin; Melissa Martyn; Ilias Goranitis; Natalie Thorne; Clara L Gaff; Susan M White Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Karthik A Jagadeesh; Aaron M Wenger; Mark J Berger; Harendra Guturu; Peter D Stenson; David N Cooper; Jonathan A Bernstein; Gill Bejerano Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Josephine Johnston; John D Lantos; Aaron Goldenberg; Flavia Chen; Erik Parens; Barbara A Koenig Journal: Hastings Cent Rep Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.683