Solveig Montaut1, Christine Tranchant1,2,3, Nathalie Drouot3, Gabrielle Rudolf1,2,3, Claire Guissart4, Julien Tarabeux5, Tristan Stemmelen3, Amandine Velt5, Cécile Fourrage6, Patrick Nitschké6, Bénédicte Gerard5, Jean-Louis Mandel3,5, Michel Koenig4, Jamel Chelly2,3,5, Mathieu Anheim1,2,3. 1. Département de Neurologie, Hôpital de Hautepierre, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 2. Fédération de Médecine Translationnelle de Strasbourg (FMTS), Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 3. Institut de Génétique et de Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, Illkirch, France. 4. EA7402, Laboratoire de Génétique Moléculaire, Institut de Recherche Clinique, Montpellier University Hospital, France. 5. Laboratoire de Diagnostic Génétique, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. 6. Institut Imagine, Imagine Bioinformatics Platform, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France.
Abstract
Importance: Movement disorders are characterized by a marked genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity, complicating diagnostic work in clinical practice and molecular diagnosis. Objective: To develop and evaluate a targeted sequencing approach using a customized panel of genes involved in movement disorders. Design, Setting and Participants: We selected 127 genes associated with movement disorders to create a customized enrichment in solution capture array. Targeted high-coverage sequencing was applied to DNA samples taken from 378 eligible patients at 1 Luxembourgian, 1 Algerian, and 25 French tertiary movement disorder centers between September 2014 and July 2016. Patients were suspected of having inherited movement disorders because of early onset, family history, and/or complex phenotypes. They were divided in 5 main movement disorder groups: parkinsonism, dystonia, chorea, paroxysmal movement disorder, and myoclonus. To compare approaches, 23 additional patients suspected of having inherited cerebellar ataxia were included, on whom whole-exome sequencing (WES) was done. Data analysis occurred from November 2015 to October 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Percentages of individuals with positive diagnosis, variants of unknown significance, and negative cases; mutational frequencies and clinical phenotyping of genes associated with movement disorders. Results: Of the 378 patients (of whom 208 were male [55.0%]), and with a median (range) age at disease onset of 31 (0-84) years, probable pathogenic variants were identified in 83 cases (22.0%): 46 patients with parkinsonism (55% of 83 patients), 21 patients (25.3%) with dystonia, 7 patients (8.4%) with chorea, 7 patients (8.4%) with paroxysmal movement disorders, and 2 patients (2.4%) with myoclonus as the predominant phenotype. Some genes were mutated in several cases in the cohort. Patients with pathogenic variants were significantly younger (median age, 27 years; interquartile range [IQR], 5-36 years]) than the patients without diagnosis (median age, 35 years; IQR, 15-46 years; P = .04). Diagnostic yield was significantly lower in patients with dystonia (21 of 135; 15.6%; P = .03) than in the overall cohort. Unexpected genotype-phenotype correlations in patients with pathogenic variants deviating from the classic phenotype were highlighted, and 49 novel probable pathogenic variants were identified. The WES analysis of the cohort of 23 patients with cerebellar ataxia led to an overall diagnostic yield of 26%, similar to panel analysis but at a cost 6 to 7 times greater. Conclusions and Relevance: High-coverage sequencing panel for the delineation of genes associated with movement disorders was efficient and provided a cost-effective diagnostic alternative to whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing.
Importance: Movement disorders are characterized by a marked genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity, complicating diagnostic work in clinical practice and molecular diagnosis. Objective: To develop and evaluate a targeted sequencing approach using a customized panel of genes involved in movement disorders. Design, Setting and Participants: We selected 127 genes associated with movement disorders to create a customized enrichment in solution capture array. Targeted high-coverage sequencing was applied to DNA samples taken from 378 eligible patients at 1 Luxembourgian, 1 Algerian, and 25 French tertiary movement disorder centers between September 2014 and July 2016. Patients were suspected of having inherited movement disorders because of early onset, family history, and/or complex phenotypes. They were divided in 5 main movement disorder groups: parkinsonism, dystonia, chorea, paroxysmal movement disorder, and myoclonus. To compare approaches, 23 additional patients suspected of having inherited cerebellar ataxia were included, on whom whole-exome sequencing (WES) was done. Data analysis occurred from November 2015 to October 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Percentages of individuals with positive diagnosis, variants of unknown significance, and negative cases; mutational frequencies and clinical phenotyping of genes associated with movement disorders. Results: Of the 378 patients (of whom 208 were male [55.0%]), and with a median (range) age at disease onset of 31 (0-84) years, probable pathogenic variants were identified in 83 cases (22.0%): 46 patients with parkinsonism (55% of 83 patients), 21 patients (25.3%) with dystonia, 7 patients (8.4%) with chorea, 7 patients (8.4%) with paroxysmal movement disorders, and 2 patients (2.4%) with myoclonus as the predominant phenotype. Some genes were mutated in several cases in the cohort. Patients with pathogenic variants were significantly younger (median age, 27 years; interquartile range [IQR], 5-36 years]) than the patients without diagnosis (median age, 35 years; IQR, 15-46 years; P = .04). Diagnostic yield was significantly lower in patients with dystonia (21 of 135; 15.6%; P = .03) than in the overall cohort. Unexpected genotype-phenotype correlations in patients with pathogenic variants deviating from the classic phenotype were highlighted, and 49 novel probable pathogenic variants were identified. The WES analysis of the cohort of 23 patients with cerebellar ataxia led to an overall diagnostic yield of 26%, similar to panel analysis but at a cost 6 to 7 times greater. Conclusions and Relevance: High-coverage sequencing panel for the delineation of genes associated with movement disorders was efficient and provided a cost-effective diagnostic alternative to whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing.
Authors: Martje E van Egmond; Coen H A Lugtenberg; Oebele F Brouwer; Maria Fiorella Contarino; Victor S C Fung; M Rebecca Heiner-Fokkema; Jacobus J van Hilten; Annemarie H van der Hout; Kathryn J Peall; Richard J Sinke; Emmanuel Roze; Corien C Verschuuren-Bemelmans; Michel A Willemsen; Nicole I Wolf; Marina A Tijssen; Tom J de Koning Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Brent L Fogel; Hane Lee; Joshua L Deignan; Samuel P Strom; Sibel Kantarci; Xizhe Wang; Fabiola Quintero-Rivera; Eric Vilain; Wayne W Grody; Susan Perlman; Daniel H Geschwind; Stanley F Nelson Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Susana Rocha; Ana Cristina Ferreira; Ana Isabel Dias; José Pedro Vieira; Sílvia Sequeira Journal: Brain Dev Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Corinne Lautier; Stefano Goldwurm; Alexandra Dürr; Barbara Giovannone; William G Tsiaras; Gianni Pezzoli; Alexis Brice; Robert J Smith Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Claire S Leblond; Jutta Heinrich; Richard Delorme; Christian Proepper; Catalina Betancur; Guillaume Huguet; Marina Konyukh; Pauline Chaste; Elodie Ey; Maria Rastam; Henrik Anckarsäter; Gudrun Nygren; I Carina Gillberg; Jonas Melke; Roberto Toro; Beatrice Regnault; Fabien Fauchereau; Oriane Mercati; Nathalie Lemière; David Skuse; Martin Poot; Richard Holt; Anthony P Monaco; Irma Järvelä; Katri Kantojärvi; Raija Vanhala; Sarah Curran; David A Collier; Patrick Bolton; Andreas Chiocchetti; Sabine M Klauck; Fritz Poustka; Christine M Freitag; Regina Waltes; Marnie Kopp; Eftichia Duketis; Elena Bacchelli; Fiorella Minopoli; Liliana Ruta; Agatino Battaglia; Luigi Mazzone; Elena Maestrini; Ana F Sequeira; Barbara Oliveira; Astrid Vicente; Guiomar Oliveira; Dalila Pinto; Stephen W Scherer; Diana Zelenika; Marc Delepine; Mark Lathrop; Dominique Bonneau; Vincent Guinchat; Françoise Devillard; Brigitte Assouline; Marie-Christine Mouren; Marion Leboyer; Christopher Gillberg; Tobias M Boeckers; Thomas Bourgeron Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2012-02-09 Impact factor: 5.917
Authors: Gavin Charlesworth; Vincent Plagnol; Kira M Holmström; Jose Bras; Una-Marie Sheerin; Elisavet Preza; Ignacio Rubio-Agusti; Mina Ryten; Susanne A Schneider; Maria Stamelou; Daniah Trabzuni; Andrey Y Abramov; Kailash P Bhatia; Nicholas W Wood Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Kathie J Ngo; Jessica E Rexach; Hane Lee; Lauren E Petty; Susan Perlman; Juliana M Valera; Joshua L Deignan; Yuanming Mao; Mamdouh Aker; Jennifer E Posey; Shalini N Jhangiani; Zeynep H Coban-Akdemir; Eric Boerwinkle; Donna Muzny; Alexandra B Nelson; Sharon Hassin-Baer; Gemma Poke; Katherine Neas; Michael D Geschwind; Wayne W Grody; Richard Gibbs; Daniel H Geschwind; James R Lupski; Jennifer E Below; Stanley F Nelson; Brent L Fogel Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2019-11-25 Impact factor: 4.700
Authors: Christine Y Kim; Thomas Wirth; Cécile Hubsch; Andrea H Németh; Volkan Okur; Mathieu Anheim; Nathalie Drouot; Christine Tranchant; Gabrielle Rudolf; Jamel Chelly; Katrina Tatton-Brown; Cornelis Blauwendraat; Jean Paul G Vonsattel; Etty Cortes; Roy N Alcalay; Wendy K Chung Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2020-08-22 Impact factor: 11.274