TY - JOUR
T1 - Considerations for reporting variants in novel candidate genes identified during clinical genomic testing
AU - Genomics Research to Elucidate the Genetics of Rare Diseases (GREGoR) Consortium
AU - Chong, Jessica X.
AU - Berger, Seth I.
AU - Baxter, Samantha
AU - Smith, Erica
AU - Xiao, Changrui
AU - Calame, Daniel G.
AU - Hawley, Megan H.
AU - Rivera-Munoz, E. Andres
AU - DiTroia, Stephanie
AU - Abouhala, Siwaar
AU - Albert, Jessica
AU - Almalvez, Miguel
AU - Alvarez, Raquel
AU - Amin, Mutaz
AU - Anderson, Peter
AU - Aradhya, Swaroop
AU - Ashley, Euan
AU - Assimes, Themistocles
AU - Auriga, Light
AU - Austin-Tse, Christina
AU - Bamshad, Mike
AU - Barseghyan, Hayk
AU - Behera, Sairam
AU - Beheshti, Shaghayegh
AU - Bejerano, Gill
AU - Berger, Seth
AU - Bernstein, Jon
AU - Best, Sabrina
AU - Blankenmeister, Benjamin
AU - Blue, Elizabeth
AU - Boerwinkle, Eric
AU - Bonkowski, Emily
AU - Bonner, Devon
AU - Boone, Philip
AU - Bornhorst, Miriam
AU - Brand, Harrison
AU - Buckingham, Kati
AU - Calame, Daniel
AU - Carter, Jennefer
AU - Casadei, Silvia
AU - Chadwick, Lisa
AU - Chavez, Clarisa
AU - Chen, Ziwei
AU - Chinn, Ivan
AU - Chong, Jessica
AU - Coban-Akdemir, Zeynep
AU - Cohen, Andrea J.
AU - Conner, Sarah
AU - Conomos, Matthew
AU - Duan, Ruizhi
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - Since the first novel gene discovery for a Mendelian condition was made via exome sequencing, the rapid increase in the number of genes known to underlie Mendelian conditions coupled with the adoption of exome (and more recently, genome) sequencing by diagnostic testing labs has changed the landscape of genomic testing for rare diseases. Specifically, many individuals suspected to have a Mendelian condition are now routinely offered clinical ES. This commonly results in a precise genetic diagnosis but frequently overlooks the identification of novel candidate genes. Such candidates are also less likely to be identified in the absence of large-scale gene discovery research programs. Accordingly, clinical laboratories have both the opportunity, and some might argue a responsibility, to contribute to novel gene discovery, which should, in turn, increase the diagnostic yield for many conditions. However, clinical diagnostic laboratories must necessarily balance priorities for throughput, turnaround time, cost efficiency, clinician preferences, and regulatory constraints and often do not have the infrastructure or resources to effectively participate in either clinical translational or basic genome science research efforts. For these and other reasons, many laboratories have historically refrained from broadly sharing potentially pathogenic variants in novel genes via networks such as Matchmaker Exchange, much less reporting such results to ordering providers. Efforts to report such results are further complicated by a lack of guidelines for clinical reporting and interpretation of variants in novel candidate genes. Nevertheless, there are myriad benefits for many stakeholders, including patients/families, clinicians, and researchers, if clinical laboratories systematically and routinely identify, share, and report novel candidate genes. To facilitate this change in practice, we developed criteria for triaging, sharing, and reporting novel candidate genes that are most likely to be promptly validated as underlying a Mendelian condition and translated to use in clinical settings.
AB - Since the first novel gene discovery for a Mendelian condition was made via exome sequencing, the rapid increase in the number of genes known to underlie Mendelian conditions coupled with the adoption of exome (and more recently, genome) sequencing by diagnostic testing labs has changed the landscape of genomic testing for rare diseases. Specifically, many individuals suspected to have a Mendelian condition are now routinely offered clinical ES. This commonly results in a precise genetic diagnosis but frequently overlooks the identification of novel candidate genes. Such candidates are also less likely to be identified in the absence of large-scale gene discovery research programs. Accordingly, clinical laboratories have both the opportunity, and some might argue a responsibility, to contribute to novel gene discovery, which should, in turn, increase the diagnostic yield for many conditions. However, clinical diagnostic laboratories must necessarily balance priorities for throughput, turnaround time, cost efficiency, clinician preferences, and regulatory constraints and often do not have the infrastructure or resources to effectively participate in either clinical translational or basic genome science research efforts. For these and other reasons, many laboratories have historically refrained from broadly sharing potentially pathogenic variants in novel genes via networks such as Matchmaker Exchange, much less reporting such results to ordering providers. Efforts to report such results are further complicated by a lack of guidelines for clinical reporting and interpretation of variants in novel candidate genes. Nevertheless, there are myriad benefits for many stakeholders, including patients/families, clinicians, and researchers, if clinical laboratories systematically and routinely identify, share, and report novel candidate genes. To facilitate this change in practice, we developed criteria for triaging, sharing, and reporting novel candidate genes that are most likely to be promptly validated as underlying a Mendelian condition and translated to use in clinical settings.
KW - Candidate gene
KW - Diagnostics
KW - Gene discovery
KW - Mendelian disorder
KW - Rare disease
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85201321461
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85201321461#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1016/j.gim.2024.101199
DO - 10.1016/j.gim.2024.101199
M3 - Article
C2 - 38944749
AN - SCOPUS:85201321461
SN - 1098-3600
VL - 26
JO - Genetics in Medicine
JF - Genetics in Medicine
IS - 10
M1 - 101199
ER -