Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/12796
Title: | Narrowing the diagnostic gap: Genomes, episignatures, long-read sequencing, and health economic analyses in an exome-negative intellectual disability cohort |
Author: | Dias, K. R. Shrestha, R. Schofield, D. Evans, C. A. O'Heir, E. Zhu, Y. Zhang, F. Standen, K. Weisburd, B. Stenton, S. L. Sanchis-Juan, A. Brand, H. Talkowski, M. E. Ma, A. Ghedia, S. Wilson, M. Sandaradura, S. A. Smith, J. Kamien, B. Turner, A. Bakshi, M. Adès, L. C. Mowat, D. Regan, M. McGillivray, G. Savarirayan, R. White, S. M. Tan, T. Y. Stark, Z. Brown, N. J. Pérez-Jurado, L. A. Krzesinski, E. Hunter, M. F. Akesson, L. Fennell, A. P. Yeung, A. Boughtwood, T. Ewans, L. J. Kerkhof, J. Lucas, C. Carey, L. French, H. Rapadas, M. Stevanovski, I. Deveson, I. W. Cliffe, C. Elakis, G. Kirk, E. P. Dudding-Byth, T. Fletcher, J. Walsh, R. Corbett, M. A. Kroes, T. Gecz, J. Meldrum, C. Cliffe, S. Wall, M. Lunke, S. North, K. Amor, D. J. Field, M. Sadikovic, B. Buckley, M. F. O'Donnell-Luria, A. Roscioli, T. |
SWSLHD Author: | Bakshi, Madhura |
Issue Date: | 2024 |
Journal: | Genetics in Medicine |
Abstract: | Purpose: Genome sequencing (GS)?specific diagnostic rates in prospective tightly ascertained exome sequencing (ES)?negative intellectual disability (ID) cohorts have not been reported extensively. Methods: ES, GS, epigenetic signatures, and long-read sequencing diagnoses were assessed in 74 trios with at least moderate ID. Results: The ES diagnostic yield was 42 of 74 (57%). GS diagnoses were made in 9 of 32 (28%) ES-unresolved families. Repeated ES with a contemporary pipeline on the GS-diagnosed families identified 8 of 9 single-nucleotide variations/copy-number variations undetected in older ES, confirming a GS-unique diagnostic rate of 1 in 32 (3%). Episignatures contributed diagnostic information in 9% with GS corroboration in 1 of 32 (3%) and diagnostic clues in 2 of 32 (6%). A genetic etiology for ID was detected in 51 of 74 (69%) families. Twelve candidate disease genes were identified. Contemporary ES followed by GS cost US$4976 (95% CI: $3704; $6969) per diagnosis and first-line GS at a cost of $7062 (95% CI: $6210; $8475) per diagnosis. Conclusion: Performing GS only in ID trios would be cost equivalent to ES if GS were available at $2435, about a 60% reduction from current prices. This study demonstrates that first-line GS achieves higher diagnostic rate than contemporary ES but at a higher cost. � 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics |
ISSN: | 10983600 (ISSN) |
Digital object identifier: | 10.1016/j.gim.2024.101076 |
URI: | https://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/12796 |
Department: | Liverpool Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics |
Appears in Collections: | Liverpool Hospital |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in Prosentient are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.