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.
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.
Authors: Shira Rockowitz; Nicholas LeCompte; Mary Carmack; Andrew Quitadamo; Lily Wang; Meredith Park; Devon Knight; Emma Sexton; Lacey Smith; Beth Sheidley; Michael Field; Ingrid A Holm; Catherine A Brownstein; Pankaj B Agrawal; Susan Kornetsky; Annapurna Poduri; Scott B Snapper; Alan H Beggs; Timothy W Yu; David A Williams; Piotr Sliz Journal: NPJ Genom Med Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 8.617
Authors: Lauren S Akesson; Stefanie Eggers; Clare J Love; Belinda Chong; Emma I Krzesinski; Natasha J Brown; Tiong Y Tan; Christopher M Richmond; David R Thorburn; John Christodoulou; Matthew F Hunter; Sebastian Lunke; Zornitza Stark Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2019-07-29 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Katharine Press Callahan; John Flibotte; Cara Skraban; Katherine Taylor Wild; Steven Joffe; David Munson; Chris Feudtner Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Kandamurugu Manickam; Monica R McClain; Laurie A Demmer; Sawona Biswas; Hutton M Kearney; Jennifer Malinowski; Lauren J Massingham; Danny Miller; Timothy W Yu; Fuki M Hisama Journal: Genet Med Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Shira Rockowitz; Nicholas LeCompte; Mary Carmack; Andrew Quitadamo; Lily Wang; Meredith Park; Devon Knight; Emma Sexton; Lacey Smith; Beth Sheidley; Michael Field; Ingrid A Holm; Catherine A Brownstein; Pankaj B Agrawal; Susan Kornetsky; Annapurna Poduri; Scott B Snapper; Alan H Beggs; Timothy W Yu; David A Williams; Piotr Sliz Journal: NPJ Genom Med Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 8.617