Jamie D Kapplinger1, Krishna N Pundi1, Nicholas B Larson1, Thomas E Callis1, David J Tester1, Hennie Bikker1, Arthur A M Wilde1, Michael J Ackerman2. 1. From the Mayo Clinic School of Medicine (J.D.K., M.J.A.), Medical Scientist Training Program (J.D.K., M.J.A.), Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Windland Smith Rice Sudden Death Genomics Laboratory (J.D.K., D.J.T., M.J.A.), Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research (N.B.L.), Division of Heart Rhythm Services, Department of Cardiovascular Diseases (D.J.T., M.J.A.), and Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics (M.J.A.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA (K.N.P.); Transgenomic Inc, New Haven, CT (T.E.C.); and Department of Clinical Genetics (H.B.) and Heart Centre, Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology (A.A.M.W.), Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. From the Mayo Clinic School of Medicine (J.D.K., M.J.A.), Medical Scientist Training Program (J.D.K., M.J.A.), Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Windland Smith Rice Sudden Death Genomics Laboratory (J.D.K., D.J.T., M.J.A.), Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research (N.B.L.), Division of Heart Rhythm Services, Department of Cardiovascular Diseases (D.J.T., M.J.A.), and Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics (M.J.A.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA (K.N.P.); Transgenomic Inc, New Haven, CT (T.E.C.); and Department of Clinical Genetics (H.B.) and Heart Centre, Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology (A.A.M.W.), Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. ackerman.michael@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathogenic RYR2 variants account for ≈60% of clinically definite cases of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. However, the rate of rare benign RYR2 variants identified in the general population remains a challenge for genetic test interpretation. Therefore, we examined the results of the RYR2 genetic test among patients referred for commercial genetic testing and examined factors impacting variant interpretability. METHODS: Frequency and location comparisons were made for RYR2 variants identified among 1355 total patients of varying clinical certainty and 60 706 Exome Aggregation Consortium controls. The impact of the clinical phenotype on the yield of RYR2 variants was examined. Six in silico tools were assessed using patient- and control-derived variants. RESULTS: A total of 18.2% (218/1200) of patients referred for commercial testing hosted rare RYR2 variants, statistically less than the 59% (46/78) yield among clinically definite cases, resulting in a much higher potential genetic false discovery rate among referrals considering the 3.2% background rate of rare, benign RYR2 variants. Exclusion of clearly putative pathogenic variants further complicates the interpretation of the next novel RYR2 variant. Exonic/topologic analyses revealed overrepresentation of patient variants in exons covering only one third of the protein. In silico tools largely failed to show evidence toward enhancement of variant interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Current expert recommendations have resulted in increased use of RYR2 genetic testing in patients with questionable clinical phenotypes. Using the largest to date catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia patient versus control comparison, this study highlights important variables in the interpretation of variants to overcome the 3.2% background rate that confounds RYR2 variant interpretation.
BACKGROUND: Pathogenic RYR2 variants account for ≈60% of clinically definite cases of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. However, the rate of rare benign RYR2 variants identified in the general population remains a challenge for genetic test interpretation. Therefore, we examined the results of the RYR2 genetic test among patients referred for commercial genetic testing and examined factors impacting variant interpretability. METHODS: Frequency and location comparisons were made for RYR2 variants identified among 1355 total patients of varying clinical certainty and 60 706 Exome Aggregation Consortium controls. The impact of the clinical phenotype on the yield of RYR2 variants was examined. Six in silico tools were assessed using patient- and control-derived variants. RESULTS: A total of 18.2% (218/1200) of patients referred for commercial testing hosted rare RYR2 variants, statistically less than the 59% (46/78) yield among clinically definite cases, resulting in a much higher potential genetic false discovery rate among referrals considering the 3.2% background rate of rare, benign RYR2 variants. Exclusion of clearly putative pathogenic variants further complicates the interpretation of the next novel RYR2 variant. Exonic/topologic analyses revealed overrepresentation of patient variants in exons covering only one third of the protein. In silico tools largely failed to show evidence toward enhancement of variant interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Current expert recommendations have resulted in increased use of RYR2 genetic testing in patients with questionable clinical phenotypes. Using the largest to date catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardiapatient versus control comparison, this study highlights important variables in the interpretation of variants to overcome the 3.2% background rate that confounds RYR2 variant interpretation.
Authors: Francisco J Alvarado; J Martijn Bos; Zhiguang Yuchi; Carmen R Valdivia; Jonathan J Hernández; Yan-Ting Zhao; Dawn S Henderlong; Yan Chen; Talia R Booher; Cherisse A Marcou; Filip Van Petegem; Michael J Ackerman; Héctor H Valdivia Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2019-03-05
Authors: Arthur A M Wilde; Christopher Semsarian; Manlio F Márquez; Alireza Sepehri Shamloo; Michael J Ackerman; Euan A Ashley; Back Sternick Eduardo; Héctor Barajas-Martinez; Elijah R Behr; Connie R Bezzina; Jeroen Breckpot; Philippe Charron; Priya Chockalingam; Lia Crotti; Michael H Gollob; Steven Lubitz; Naomasa Makita; Seiko Ohno; Martín Ortiz-Genga; Luciana Sacilotto; Eric Schulze-Bahr; Wataru Shimizu; Nona Sotoodehnia; Rafik Tadros; James S Ware; David S Winlaw; Elizabeth S Kaufman; Takeshi Aiba; Andreas Bollmann; Jong-Il Choi; Aarti Dalal; Francisco Darrieux; John Giudicessi; Mariana Guerchicoff; Kui Hong; Andrew D Krahn; Ciorsti Mac Intyre; Judith A Mackall; Lluís Mont; Carlo Napolitano; Pablo Ochoa Juan; Petr Peichl; Alexandre C Pereira; Peter J Schwartz; Jon Skinner; Christoph Stellbrink; Jacob Tfelt-Hansen; Thomas Deneke Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2022-05-31
Authors: Mohit M Hulsurkar; Satadru K Lahiri; Jason Karch; Meng C Wang; Xander H T Wehrens Journal: Expert Opin Ther Targets Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 6.797
Authors: Arthur A M Wilde; Christopher Semsarian; Manlio F Márquez; Alireza Sepehri Shamloo; Michael J Ackerman; Euan A Ashley; Eduardo Back Sternick; Héctor Barajas-Martinez; Elijah R Behr; Connie R Bezzina; Jeroen Breckpot; Philippe Charron; Priya Chockalingam; Lia Crotti; Michael H Gollob; Steven Lubitz; Naomasa Makita; Seiko Ohno; Martín Ortiz-Genga; Luciana Sacilotto; Eric Schulze-Bahr; Wataru Shimizu; Nona Sotoodehnia; Rafik Tadros; James S Ware; David S Winlaw; Elizabeth S Kaufman; Takeshi Aiba; Andreas Bollmann; Jong Il Choi; Aarti Dalal; Francisco Darrieux; John Giudicessi; Mariana Guerchicoff; Kui Hong; Andrew D Krahn; Ciorsti MacIntyre; Judith A Mackall; Lluís Mont; Carlo Napolitano; Juan Pablo Ochoa; Petr Peichl; Alexandre C Pereira; Peter J Schwartz; Jon Skinner; Christoph Stellbrink; Jacob Tfelt-Hansen; Thomas Deneke Journal: Europace Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 5.486
Authors: Alexander Kushnir; Joshua J Todd; Jessica W Witherspoon; Qi Yuan; Steven Reiken; Harvey Lin; Ross H Munce; Benjamin Wajsberg; Zephan Melville; Oliver B Clarke; Kaylee Wedderburn-Pugh; Anetta Wronska; Muslima S Razaqyar; Irene C Chrismer; Monique O Shelton; Ami Mankodi; Christopher Grunseich; Mark A Tarnopolsky; Kurenai Tanji; Michio Hirano; Sheila Riazi; Natalia Kraeva; Nicol C Voermans; Angela Gruber; Carolyn Allen; Katherine G Meilleur; Andrew R Marks Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Thomas M Roston; Omid Haji-Ghassemi; Martin J LaPage; Anjan S Batra; Yaniv Bar-Cohen; Chris Anderson; Yung R Lau; Kathleen Maginot; Roman A Gebauer; Susan P Etheridge; James E Potts; Filip Van Petegem; Shubhayan Sanatani Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-11-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Roddy Walsh; Francesco Mazzarotto; Nicola Whiffin; Rachel Buchan; William Midwinter; Alicja Wilk; Nicholas Li; Leanne Felkin; Nathan Ingold; Risha Govind; Mian Ahmad; Erica Mazaika; Mona Allouba; Xiaolei Zhang; Antonio de Marvao; Sharlene M Day; Euan Ashley; Steven D Colan; Michelle Michels; Alexandre C Pereira; Daniel Jacoby; Carolyn Y Ho; Kate L Thomson; Hugh Watkins; Paul J R Barton; Iacopo Olivotto; Stuart A Cook; James S Ware Journal: Genome Med Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 11.117
Authors: Antonio Frontera; Konstantinos Vlachos; Takeshi Kitamura; Saagar Mahida; Xavier Pillois; Gerard Fahy; Christelle Marquie; Riccardo Cappato; Graham Stuart; Pascal Defaye; Juan Pablo Kaski; Joris Ector; Alice Maltret; Patrice Scanu; Jean-Luc Pasquie; Isabelle Deisenhofer; Ivan Blankoff; Daniel Scherr; Martin Manninger; Yoshifusa Aizawa; Linda Koutbi; Arnaud Denis; Thomas Pambrun; Philippe Ritter; Frederic Sacher; Meleze Hocini; Philippe Maury; Pierre Jaïs; Pierre Bordachar; Michel Haïssaguerre; Nicolas Derval Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 5.501