Kristen M. Wigby, Deanna Brockman, Gregory Costain, Caitlin Hale, Stacie L. Taylor, John Belmont, David Bick, David Dimmock, Susan Fernbach, John Greally, Vaidehi Jobanputra, Shashikant Kulkarni, Elizabeth Spiteri, Ryan J. Taft
{"title":"Evidence review and considerations for use of first line genome sequencing to diagnose rare genetic disorders","authors":"Kristen M. Wigby, Deanna Brockman, Gregory Costain, Caitlin Hale, Stacie L. Taylor, John Belmont, David Bick, David Dimmock, Susan Fernbach, John Greally, Vaidehi Jobanputra, Shashikant Kulkarni, Elizabeth Spiteri, Ryan J. Taft","doi":"10.1038/s41525-024-00396-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Early use of genome sequencing (GS) in the diagnostic odyssey can reduce suffering and improve care, but questions remain about which patient populations are most amenable to GS as a first-line diagnostic test. To address this, the Medical Genome Initiative conducted a literature review to identify appropriate clinical indications for GS. Studies published from January 2011 to August 2022 that reported on the diagnostic yield (DY) or clinical utility of GS were included. An exploratory meta-analysis using a random effects model evaluated DY based on cohort size and diagnosed cases per cohort. Seventy-one studies met inclusion criteria, comprising over 13,000 patients who received GS in one of the following settings: hospitalized pediatric patients, pediatric outpatients, adult outpatients, or mixed. GS was the first-line test in 38% (27/71). The unweighted mean DY of first-line GS was 45% (12–73%), 33% (6–86%) in cohorts with prior genetic testing, and 33% (9–60%) in exome-negative cohorts. Clinical utility was reported in 81% of first-line GS studies in hospitalized pediatric patients. Changes in management varied by cohort and underlying molecular diagnosis (24–100%). To develop evidence-informed points to consider, the quality of all 71 studies was assessed using modified American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria, with five core points to consider developed, including recommendations for use of GS in the N/PICU, in lieu of sequential testing and when disorders with substantial allelic heterogeneity are suspected. Future large and controlled studies in the pediatric and adult populations may support further refinement of these recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":19273,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Genomic Medicine","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Genomic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-024-00396-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Early use of genome sequencing (GS) in the diagnostic odyssey can reduce suffering and improve care, but questions remain about which patient populations are most amenable to GS as a first-line diagnostic test. To address this, the Medical Genome Initiative conducted a literature review to identify appropriate clinical indications for GS. Studies published from January 2011 to August 2022 that reported on the diagnostic yield (DY) or clinical utility of GS were included. An exploratory meta-analysis using a random effects model evaluated DY based on cohort size and diagnosed cases per cohort. Seventy-one studies met inclusion criteria, comprising over 13,000 patients who received GS in one of the following settings: hospitalized pediatric patients, pediatric outpatients, adult outpatients, or mixed. GS was the first-line test in 38% (27/71). The unweighted mean DY of first-line GS was 45% (12–73%), 33% (6–86%) in cohorts with prior genetic testing, and 33% (9–60%) in exome-negative cohorts. Clinical utility was reported in 81% of first-line GS studies in hospitalized pediatric patients. Changes in management varied by cohort and underlying molecular diagnosis (24–100%). To develop evidence-informed points to consider, the quality of all 71 studies was assessed using modified American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria, with five core points to consider developed, including recommendations for use of GS in the N/PICU, in lieu of sequential testing and when disorders with substantial allelic heterogeneity are suspected. Future large and controlled studies in the pediatric and adult populations may support further refinement of these recommendations.
NPJ Genomic MedicineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Molecular Biology
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
67
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍:
npj Genomic Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing the most important scientific advances in all aspects of genomics and its application in the practice of medicine.
The journal defines genomic medicine as "diagnosis, prognosis, prevention and/or treatment of disease and disorders of the mind and body, using approaches informed or enabled by knowledge of the genome and the molecules it encodes." Relevant and high-impact papers that encompass studies of individuals, families, or populations are considered for publication. An emphasis will include coupling detailed phenotype and genome sequencing information, both enabled by new technologies and informatics, to delineate the underlying aetiology of disease. Clinical recommendations and/or guidelines of how that data should be used in the clinical management of those patients in the study, and others, are also encouraged.