Massomeh Sheikh Hassani, Ruchi Jain, Sathishkumar Ramaswamy, Shruti Sinha, Maha El Naofal, Nour Halabi, Sawsan Alyafei, Roudha Alfalasi, Shruti Shenbagam, Alan Taylor, Ahmad Abou Tayoun
{"title":"与静态面板相比,虚拟基因面板对遗传性罕见病的诊断率更高","authors":"Massomeh Sheikh Hassani, Ruchi Jain, Sathishkumar Ramaswamy, Shruti Sinha, Maha El Naofal, Nour Halabi, Sawsan Alyafei, Roudha Alfalasi, Shruti Shenbagam, Alan Taylor, Ahmad Abou Tayoun","doi":"10.1093/clinchem/hvae183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Exome- or genome-based panels—also known as slices or virtual panels—are now a popular approach that involves comprehensive genomic sequencing while restricting analysis to subsets of genes based on patients’ phenotypes. This flexible strategy enables frequent gene updates based on novel disease associations as well as reflexing to analyzing other genes up to the whole exome or genome. With recent improvements addressing limitations associated with virtual panels, the advantages of this approach, relative to static custom-based panels, remain to be systematically characterized. Methods Here we perform slice testing on 1014 patients (50.5% females; average age 17 years) referred from multiple pediatric clinics within a single center in the Middle East (83% Arab population). Results Initial analysis uncovered molecular diagnoses for 235 patients for a diagnostic yield of 23% (235/1014). “On the fly” focused analysis in most negative cases (N = 779) identified clinically significant variants correlating with patients’ presentations in genes outside the originally ordered panel for another 35 patients (3.5% or 35/1024) increasing the overall diagnostic yield to 27%. The pathogenic variants underlying the additional cases (13% of all positive cases) were excluded from the original “panel” gene list, mainly as result of issues related to panel selection, novel gene–disease associations, phenotype spectrum broadening, or gene lists variability. The additional findings led to changes in clinical management in most patients (94%). Conclusions Our findings support slice testing as an efficient and flexible platform that facilitates updates to gene lists to achieve high clinical sensitivity and utility.","PeriodicalId":10690,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry","volume":"170 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virtual Gene Panels Have a Superior Diagnostic Yield for Inherited Rare Diseases Relative to Static Panels\",\"authors\":\"Massomeh Sheikh Hassani, Ruchi Jain, Sathishkumar Ramaswamy, Shruti Sinha, Maha El Naofal, Nour Halabi, Sawsan Alyafei, Roudha Alfalasi, Shruti Shenbagam, Alan Taylor, Ahmad Abou Tayoun\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/clinchem/hvae183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Exome- or genome-based panels—also known as slices or virtual panels—are now a popular approach that involves comprehensive genomic sequencing while restricting analysis to subsets of genes based on patients’ phenotypes. This flexible strategy enables frequent gene updates based on novel disease associations as well as reflexing to analyzing other genes up to the whole exome or genome. With recent improvements addressing limitations associated with virtual panels, the advantages of this approach, relative to static custom-based panels, remain to be systematically characterized. Methods Here we perform slice testing on 1014 patients (50.5% females; average age 17 years) referred from multiple pediatric clinics within a single center in the Middle East (83% Arab population). Results Initial analysis uncovered molecular diagnoses for 235 patients for a diagnostic yield of 23% (235/1014). “On the fly” focused analysis in most negative cases (N = 779) identified clinically significant variants correlating with patients’ presentations in genes outside the originally ordered panel for another 35 patients (3.5% or 35/1024) increasing the overall diagnostic yield to 27%. The pathogenic variants underlying the additional cases (13% of all positive cases) were excluded from the original “panel” gene list, mainly as result of issues related to panel selection, novel gene–disease associations, phenotype spectrum broadening, or gene lists variability. The additional findings led to changes in clinical management in most patients (94%). Conclusions Our findings support slice testing as an efficient and flexible platform that facilitates updates to gene lists to achieve high clinical sensitivity and utility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical chemistry\",\"volume\":\"170 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae183\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae183","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Virtual Gene Panels Have a Superior Diagnostic Yield for Inherited Rare Diseases Relative to Static Panels
Background Exome- or genome-based panels—also known as slices or virtual panels—are now a popular approach that involves comprehensive genomic sequencing while restricting analysis to subsets of genes based on patients’ phenotypes. This flexible strategy enables frequent gene updates based on novel disease associations as well as reflexing to analyzing other genes up to the whole exome or genome. With recent improvements addressing limitations associated with virtual panels, the advantages of this approach, relative to static custom-based panels, remain to be systematically characterized. Methods Here we perform slice testing on 1014 patients (50.5% females; average age 17 years) referred from multiple pediatric clinics within a single center in the Middle East (83% Arab population). Results Initial analysis uncovered molecular diagnoses for 235 patients for a diagnostic yield of 23% (235/1014). “On the fly” focused analysis in most negative cases (N = 779) identified clinically significant variants correlating with patients’ presentations in genes outside the originally ordered panel for another 35 patients (3.5% or 35/1024) increasing the overall diagnostic yield to 27%. The pathogenic variants underlying the additional cases (13% of all positive cases) were excluded from the original “panel” gene list, mainly as result of issues related to panel selection, novel gene–disease associations, phenotype spectrum broadening, or gene lists variability. The additional findings led to changes in clinical management in most patients (94%). Conclusions Our findings support slice testing as an efficient and flexible platform that facilitates updates to gene lists to achieve high clinical sensitivity and utility.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Chemistry is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is the premier publication for the science and practice of clinical laboratory medicine. It was established in 1955 and is associated with the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM).
The journal focuses on laboratory diagnosis and management of patients, and has expanded to include other clinical laboratory disciplines such as genomics, hematology, microbiology, and toxicology. It also publishes articles relevant to clinical specialties including cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, genetics, immunology, infectious diseases, maternal-fetal medicine, neurology, nutrition, oncology, and pediatrics.
In addition to original research, editorials, and reviews, Clinical Chemistry features recurring sections such as clinical case studies, perspectives, podcasts, and Q&A articles. It has the highest impact factor among journals of clinical chemistry, laboratory medicine, pathology, analytical chemistry, transfusion medicine, and clinical microbiology.
The journal is indexed in databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science.