Expanding the genotypes and phenotypes for 19 rare diseases by exome sequencing performed in pediatric intensive care unit

Meta-analysis of the diagnostic and clinical utility of exome and genome sequencing in pediatric and adult patients with rare diseases across diverse populations

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis aims to compare the diagnostic and clinical utility of exome sequencing (ES) vs genome sequencing (GS) in pediatric and adult patients with rare diseases across diverse populations.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was conducted to identify studies from 2011 to 2021.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-one studies across 31 countries/regions were eligible, featuring 50,417 probands of diverse populations. Diagnostic rates of ES (0.38, 95% CI 0.36-0.40) and GS (0.34, 95% CI 0.30-0.38) were similar (P = .1). Within-cohort comparison illustrated 1.2-times odds of diagnosis by GS over ES (95% CI 0.79-1.83, P = .38). GS studies discovered a higher range of novel genes than ES studies; yet, the rate of variant of unknown significance did not differ (P = .78). Among high-quality studies, clinical utility of GS (0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.90) was higher than that of ES (0.44, 95% CI 0.30-0.58) (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides an important update to demonstrate the similar diagnostic rates between ES and GS and the higher clinical utility of GS over ES. With the newly published recommendations for clinical interpretation of variants found in noncoding regions of the genome and the trend of decreasing variant of unknown significance and GS cost, it is expected that GS will be more widely used in clinical settings.

Clinical impact of exome sequencing in the setting of a general pediatric ward for hospitalized children with suspected genetic disorders

Background: Genetic conditions contribute a significant portion of disease etiologies in children admitted to general pediatric wards worldwide. While exome sequencing (ES) has improved clinical diagnosis and management over a variety of pediatric subspecialties, it is not yet routinely used by general pediatric hospitalists. We aim to investigate the impact of exome sequencing in sequencing-naive children suspected of having monogenic disorders while receiving inpatient care. Methods: We prospectively employed exome sequencing in children admitted to the general pediatric inpatient service at a large tertiary medical center in Israel. Genetic analysis was triggered by general and/or subspecialist pediatricians who were part of the primary inpatient team. We determined the diagnostic yield among children who were referred for exome sequencing and observed the effects of genetic diagnosis on medical care. Results: A total of fifty probands were evaluated and exome sequenced during the study period. The most common phenotypes included were neurodevelopmental (56%), gastrointestinal (34%), and congenital cardiac anomalies (24%). A molecular diagnosis was reached in 38% of patients. Among seven patients (37%), the molecular genetic diagnosis influenced subsequent clinical management already during admission or shortly following discharge. Conclusion: We identified a significant fraction of genetic etiologies among undiagnosed children admitted to the general pediatric ward. Our results support that early application of exome sequencing may be maximized by pediatric hospitalists' high index of suspicion for an underlying genetic etiology, prompting an in-house genetic evaluation. This framework should include a multidisciplinary co-management approach of the primary care team working alongside with subspecialties, geneticists and bioinformaticians.