Clinical long-read genome sequencing for rare disease diagnostics
de Bitter, T. J. J.; van der Sanden, B.; Sagath, L.; Höps, W.; Arts, P.; de Groot, M.; Weiss, M. M.; Derks, R.; den Ouden, A.; van den Heuvel, S.; Timmermans, R. G. J.; van Leeuwen, T.; Corominas Galbany, J.; Smits, J. G. A.; Snijders Blok, L.; Hofste, T.; Steehouwer, M.; Zomer, N.; Sabbagh, Q.; Kamsteeg, E.-J.; Lugtenberg, D.; Bosgoed, E. A.; Rodenburg, R. J.; Sun, S. M.; Mensenkamp, A. R.; Ligtenberg, M. J. L.; de Leeuw, N.; Hellebrekers, D. M. E. I.; Stegmann, A. P. A.; Paulussen, A. D. C.; Blok, M. J.; van Zelst-Stams, W. A. G.; van den Wijngaard, A.; Yntema, H. G.; Gilissen, C.; Hoischen
Show abstract
BackgroundDiagnostic evaluation of rare genetic disorders continues to rely on multiple test modalities, despite the increasing use of short-read exome or genome sequencing as first-tier tests. Long-read genome sequencing (lrGS) has the potential to consolidate current standard-of-care (SoC) diagnostics into a single assay, but its accuracy and clinical utility in routine practice have not been established at large scale. MethodsWe studied 1000 clinical samples, including 832 index cases, representative of one year of germline diagnostic testing at two tertiary centers. Samples underwent lrGS at approximately 30x coverage, followed by variant detection and interpretation. Diagnostic outcomes were compared with those obtained through SoC testing. Using these results, we modeled the effect of implementing lrGS as a first-tier test in a cohort of 15,150 index cases who underwent diagnostic testing during a single year. ResultsThe overall concordance between SoC and lrGS testing was 96.4%. lrGS identified clinically relevant findings that improved or refined genetic diagnoses in 3.4% of cases, largely through phasing for recessive disorders and the detection of novel disease-causing variants. In 0.2% of cases, SoC testing identified variants not detected by lrGS. Modeling of a generic lrGS-first diagnostic strategy demonstrated an estimated absolute increase in diagnostic yield of 2.5% across the full annual cohort. ConclusionsLrGS demonstrated high concordance with current diagnostic approaches and provided incremental diagnostic benefits. These findings support lrGS as a feasible and effective first-tier test for rare disease diagnostics.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- IGenomic answers for children: Dynamic analyses of >1000 pediatric rare disease genomes 97%
- A Framework for Automated Gene Selection in Genomic Screening 96%
- The Importance of Automation in Genetic Diagnosis: Lessons from Analyzing an Inherited Retinal Degeneration Cohort with the Mendelian Analysis Toolkit (MATK) 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Detecting cryptic clinically-relevant structural variation in exome sequencing data increases diagnostic yield for developmental disorders 96%
- Advancing long-read nanopore genome assembly and accurate variant calling for rare disease detection 96%
- HiFi long-read genomes for difficult-to-detect clinically relevant variants 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Detection and characterisation of copy number variants from exome sequencing in the DDD study 94%
- The impact of the Turkish (TK) population variome on the genomic architecture of rare disease traits 93%
- Genetic Diagnosis of Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy Type 1 Using Rare Variant Linkage Analysis and Long Read Genome Sequencing 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Diverse ancestral representation improves genetic intolerance metrics 95%
- Saturation genome editing of DDX3X clarifies pathogenicity of germline and somatic variation 94%
- Diagnostic Utility of Genome-wide DNA Methylation Analysis in Genetically Unsolved Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathies and Refinement of a CHD2 Episignature 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.