Key result
Targeted genetic testing identifies ~29% pathogenic GLA and TTR variants, beating multigene panels at lower cost.
Why the study?
Diagnostic work-up of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is crucial for appropriate management, but the optimal genetic testing strategy remains debatable.
Does targeted genetic testing based on clinical red flags improve the diagnostic yield, time, and cost of identifying Fabry disease or transthyretin amyloidosis in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared to unselected multigene panel analysis?
Observational (n=341)
Yes
Does targeted genetic testing based on clinical red flags improve the diagnostic yield, time, and cost of identifying Fabry disease or transthyretin amyloidosis in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared to unselected multigene panel analysis?
In patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, targeted genetic testing guided by clinical red flags is more efficient, faster, and cheaper for diagnosing Fabry disease and transthyretin amyloidosis compared to unselected multigene panel sequencing.
Targeted red-flag testing may improve diagnostic efficiency for Fabry/ATTR in HCM; leaves open need for prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Diagnostic work-up of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is crucial for appropriate management. However, the optimal genetic strategy remains debatable. We compared two strategies: targeted testing based on careful examination of clinical red flags versus large multigene panel analysis without gene prioritization. We applied the strategy to the diagnosis of Fabry disease or Hereditary Transthyretin Amyloidosis (GLA or TTR genes respectively). RESULTS: We studied 341 hypertrophic cardiomyopathy index patients. Patients of subgroup 1 (n = 42) had careful clinical analysis and high suspicion of Hereditary Transthyretin Amyloidosis or Fabry disease. They underwent targeted Sanger sequencing. Patients in subgroup 2 (n = 299) did not have clinical selection, and underwent next-generation sequencing analysis of 107 cardiac genes. The yield of genetic testing for pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in GLA and/or TTR was 28.6% in subgroup 1 (12/42: 5 TTR and 7 GLA) versus 1.0% in subgroup 2 (3/299: 1 TTR and 2 GLA), p < 0.01. Genetic results were obtained after a median of 26.0 days [IQR = 18-59.8] in subgroup 1 versus 193.5 days [IQR = 174-218] in subgroup 2, p < 0.01. Finally, genetic testing cost was 615.60€ or 769.50€ for TTR or GLA targeted analysis respectively, versus 1503.90€ for multigene panel analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Both molecular strategies in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients are useful for the identification of pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in TTR/GLA genes. However, targeted genetic testing based on clinical red flags identified causal mutations more efficiently, faster and at a lower cost. Careful clinical analysis is therefore important in guiding molecular strategy and may reduce diagnostic wandering and accelerate delivery of appropriate therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palmyre et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=341). Targeted genetic testing (Sanger sequencing of GLA or TTR) based on clinical red flags vs. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) multigene panel analysis of 107 cardiac genes without clinical selection was evaluated on Yield of pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in GLA and/or TTR genes (p=<0.01). Targeted genetic testing based on clinical red flags identified pathogenic variants in GLA and TTR genes more efficiently than a multigene panel (28.6% vs 1.0%, p<0.01), faster, and at a lower cost.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: