Key result
Short-read genome sequencing yielded a molecular diagnosis in 15.3% of families with suspected Mendelian conditions and prior inconclusive genetic testing, frequently revealing cryptic exon inclusions.
Why the study?
Clinical genetic testing leaves a diagnostic gap with yields around 30-40%, prompting the evaluation of emerging sequencing technologies.
Does short-read genome sequencing improve diagnostic yield in individuals with suspected Mendelian conditions and prior inconclusive clinical genetic testing?
Cohort (n=754)
Yes
Does short-read genome sequencing improve diagnostic yield in individuals with suspected Mendelian conditions and prior inconclusive clinical genetic testing?
Short-read genome sequencing provides a molecular diagnosis in 15.3% of previously unsolved rare genetic disease cases, highlighting cryptic exon inclusion from deep intronic variants as a key disease mechanism.
Short-read GS yielded diagnoses in 15% of prior-negative Mendelian cases, often via uncovered intronic variants; leaves open whether routine use improves outcomes beyond exome reanalysis.
Purpose: Advancements in sequencing technologies have significantly improved clinical genetic testing, yet the diagnostic yield remains around 30-40%. Emerging sequencing technologies are now being deployed in the clinical setting to address the remaining diagnostic gap. Methods: We tested whether short-read genome sequencing could increase diagnostic yield in individuals enrolled into the UCI-GREGoR research study, who had suspected Mendelian conditions and prior inconclusive clinical genetic testing. Two other collaborative research cohorts, focused on aortopathy and dilated cardiomyopathy, consisted of individuals who were undiagnosed but had not undergone harmonized prior testing. Results: We sequenced 353 families (754 participants) and found a molecular diagnosis in 54 (15.3%) of them. Of these diagnoses, 55.5% were previously missed because the causative variants were in regions not interrogated by the original testing. In 5 cases, they were deep intronic variants, all of which led to abnormal splicing and pseudoexons, as directly shown by RNA sequencing. All 5 of these variants had inconclusive spliceAI scores. In 26% of newly diagnosed cases, the causal variant could have been detected by exome sequencing reanalysis. Conclusion: Genome sequencing overcomes multiple limitations of clinical genetic testing, such as inability to call intronic variants and technical limitations. Our findings highlight pseudoexons as a common mechanism via which deep intronic variants cause Mendelian disease. However, they also reinforce that reanalysis of exome datasets can be a fruitful approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pitsava et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Suspected Mendelian conditions (n=754). Short-read genome sequencing vs. Prior inconclusive clinical genetic testing was evaluated on Molecular diagnosis (diagnostic yield). Short-read genome sequencing yielded a molecular diagnosis in 15.3% of families with suspected Mendelian conditions and prior inconclusive genetic testing, frequently revealing cryptic exon inclusions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: