Literature DB >> 35727495

Secondary genomic findings in the 2020 China Neonatal Genomes Project participants.

Hui Xiao1, Jian-Tao Zhang1, Xin-Ran Dong2, Yu-Lan Lu2, Bing-Bing Wu2, Hui-Jun Wang2, Zheng-Yan Zhao3, Lin Yang4,5, Wen-Hao Zhou6,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During next generation sequencing (NGS) data interpretation in critically ill newborns, there is a potential for recognizing and reporting secondary findings (SFs). Early awareness of SFs may provide clues for disease prevention. In this study, we assessed the frequency of SFs in the China Neonatal Genomes Project (CNGP) participants.
METHODS: A total of 2020 clinical exome sequencing (CES) datasets were screened for variants from a list of 59 genes recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) for secondary findings reporting v2.0 (ACMG SF v2.0). Identified variants were classified according to the evidence-based guidelines reached by a joint consensus of the ACMG and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP).
RESULTS: Among the 2020 CES datasets, we identified 23 ACMG-reportable genes in 61 individuals, resulting in an overall frequency of SFs at 3.02%. A total of 53 unique variants were identified, including 35 pathogenic and 18 likely pathogenic variants. The common disease categories of SFs associated were cardiovascular and cancer disease. The SF results affected the medical management and follow-up strategy in 49 (80.3%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We presented the frequency of SFs and their impact on clinical management strategies in CNGP participants. Our study demonstrated that SFs have important practical value in disease prevention and intervention at an early stage.
© 2022. Children's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics secondary findings; Neonate; Next generation sequencing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35727495     DOI: 10.1007/s12519-022-00558-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Pediatr            Impact factor:   9.186


  31 in total

1.  MutationTaster evaluates disease-causing potential of sequence alterations.

Authors:  Jana Marie Schwarz; Christian Rödelsperger; Markus Schuelke; Dominik Seelow
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 28.547

2.  Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm.

Authors:  Prateek Kumar; Steven Henikoff; Pauline C Ng
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2009-06-25       Impact factor: 13.491

3.  Use of medical exome sequencing for identification of underlying genetic defects in NICU: Experience in a cohort of 2303 neonates in China.

Authors:  Lin Yang; Zejun Wei; Xiang Chen; Liyuan Hu; Xiaomin Peng; Jin Wang; Chunmei Lu; Yanting Kong; Xinran Dong; Qi Ni; Yulan Lu; Bingbing Wu; Huijun Wang; Katia Meirelles; Xia Tian; Jing Zhang; Fengqi Chang; Liu Liu; Changhua Li; Wesley You; Guoqiang Cheng; Laishuan Wang; Yun Cao; Chao Chen; Ping Fang; Sha Tang; Wenhao Zhou
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 4.438

4.  A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations.

Authors:  Ivan A Adzhubei; Steffen Schmidt; Leonid Peshkin; Vasily E Ramensky; Anna Gerasimova; Peer Bork; Alexey S Kondrashov; Shamil R Sunyaev
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 28.547

5.  ANNOVAR: functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data.

Authors:  Kai Wang; Mingyao Li; Hakon Hakonarson
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2010-07-03       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.

Authors:  Sarah S Kalia; Kathy Adelman; Sherri J Bale; Wendy K Chung; Christine Eng; James P Evans; Gail E Herman; Sophia B Hufnagel; Teri E Klein; Bruce R Korf; Kent D McKelvey; Kelly E Ormond; C Sue Richards; Christopher N Vlangos; Michael Watson; Christa L Martin; David T Miller
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 8.822

7.  Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology.

Authors:  Sue Richards; Nazneen Aziz; Sherri Bale; David Bick; Soma Das; Julie Gastier-Foster; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Elaine Spector; Karl Voelkerding; Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Clinical and genetic spectrum of a large cohort of children with epilepsy in China.

Authors:  Lin Yang; Yanting Kong; Xinran Dong; Liyuan Hu; Yifeng Lin; Xiang Chen; Qi Ni; Yulan Lu; Bingbing Wu; Huijun Wang; Q Richard Lu; Wenhao Zhou
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing.

Authors:  Robert C Green; Jonathan S Berg; Wayne W Grody; Sarah S Kalia; Bruce R Korf; Christa L Martin; Amy L McGuire; Robert L Nussbaum; Julianne M O'Daniel; Kelly E Ormond; Heidi L Rehm; Michael S Watson; Marc S Williams; Leslie G Biesecker
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  The Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor.

Authors:  William McLaren; Laurent Gil; Sarah E Hunt; Harpreet Singh Riat; Graham R S Ritchie; Anja Thormann; Paul Flicek; Fiona Cunningham
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 13.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.