Improving the Management of Patients with Hearing Loss by the Implementation of an NGS Panel in Clinical Practice

Whole exome sequencing reveals genetic landscape associated with left ventricular outflow tract obstruction in Chinese Han population

Left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO), a major form of outflow tract malformation, accounts for a substantial portion of congenital heart defects (CHDs). Unlike its prevalence, the genetic architecture of LVOTO remains largely unknown. To unveil the genetic mutations and risk genes potentially associated with LVOTO, we enrolled a cohort of 106 LVOTO patients and 100 healthy controls and performed a whole-exome sequencing (WES). 71,430 rare deleterious mutations were found in LVOTO patients. By using gene-based burden testing, we further found 32 candidate genes enriched in LVOTO patient including known pathological genes such as GATA5 and GATA6. Most variants of 32 risk genes occur simultaneously rather exclusively suggesting polygenic inherence of LVOTO and 14 genes out of 32 risk genes interact with previously discovered CHD genes. Single cell RNA-seq further revealed dynamic expressions of GATA5, GATA6, FOXD3 and MYO6 in endocardium and neural crest lineage indicating the mutations of these genes lead to LVOTO possibly through different lineages. These findings uncover the genetic architecture of LVOTO which advances the current understanding of LVOTO genetics.

Next-generation sequencing improves precision medicine in hearing loss

Background: An early etiological diagnosis of hearing loss positively impacts children's quality of life including language and cognitive development. Even though hearing loss associates with extremely high genetic and allelic heterogeneity, several studies have proven that Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS)-based gene panel testing significantly reduces the time between onset and diagnosis. Methods: In order to assess the clinical utility of our custom NGS GHELP panel, the prevalence of pathogenic single nucleotide variants, indels or copy number variants was assessed by sequencing 171 nuclear and 8 mitochondrial genes in 155 Spanish individuals with hearing loss. Results: A genetic diagnosis of hearing loss was achieved in 34% (52/155) of the individuals (5 out of 52 were syndromic). Among the diagnosed cases, 87% (45/52) and 12% (6/52) associated with autosomal recessive and dominant inheritance patterns respectively; remarkably, 2% (1/52) associated with mitochondrial inheritance pattern. Although the most frequently mutated genes in this cohort were consistent with those described in the literature (GJB2, OTOF or MYO7A), causative variants in less frequent genes such as TMC1, FGF3 or mitCOX1 were also identified. Moreover, 5% of the diagnosed cases (3/52) were associated with pathogenic copy number variants. Conclusion: The clinical utility of NGS panels that allows identification of different types of pathogenic variants-not only single nucleotide variants/indels in both nuclear and mitochondrial genes but also copy number variants-has been demonstrated to reduce the clinical diagnostic odyssey in hearing loss. Thus, clinical implementation of genomic strategies within the regular clinical practice, and, more significantly, within the newborn screening protocols, is warranted.

Genetic screening of a Chinese cohort of children with hearing loss using a next-generation sequencing panel

BACKGROUND

At present, the hereditary hearing loss homepage, ( https://hereditaryhearingloss.org/ ), includes 258 deafness genes and more than 500 genes that have been reported to cause deafness. With few exceptions, the region-specific distributions are unclear for many of the identified variants and genes.

METHODS

Here, we used a custom capture panel to perform targeted sequencing of 518 genes in a cohort of 879 deaf Chinese probands who lived in Yunnan. Mutation sites of the parents were performed by high-throughput sequencing and validated by Sanger sequencing.

RESULTS

The ratio of male to female patients was close to 1:1 (441:438) and the age of onset was mainly under six. Most patients (93.5%) were diagnosed with moderate to severe deafness. Four hundred and twenty-eight patients had variants in a deafness gene, with a detection rate of 48.7%. Pathogenic variants were detected in 98 genes and a number of these were recurrent within the cohort. However, many of the variants were rarely observed in the cohort. In accordance with the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, pathogenic, likely pathogenic and variants of uncertain significance accounted for 34.3%, 19.3% and 46.4% of all detected variants, respectively. The most common genes included GJB2, SLC26A4, MYO15A, MYO7A, TMC1, CDH23, USH2A and WFS1, which contained variants in more than ten cases. The two genes with the highest mutation frequency were GJB2 and SLC26A4, which accounted for 28.5% (122/428) of positive patients. We showed that more than 60.3% of coding variants were rare and novel. Of the variants that we detected, 80.0% were in coding regions, 17.9% were in introns and 2.1% were copy number variants.

CONCLUSION

The common mutation genes and loci detected in this study were different from those detected in other regions or ethnic groups, which suggested that genetic screening or testing programs for deafness should be formulated in accordance with the genetic characteristics of the region.

Mutation analysis of the WFS1 gene in a Chinese family with autosomal-dominant non-syndrome deafness

To analyse the pathogenic genes and mutations of a family with hereditary deafness. We recruited a three-generation family with NSHL. A detailed medical history inquiry and related examinations were performed. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used to confirm the gene mutation in the proband, and Sanger sequencing was used for verification. The effect of the WFS1 mutation on the function and structure of the wolframin protein was predicted by multiple computational software. From the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database, we obtained GSE40585 dataset and performed enrichment analyses. The family clinically manifested as autosomal dominant NSHL. A novel WFS1 c.2421C>G (p.Ser807Arg) mutation was identified in four affected individuals in the pedigree . The p.Ser807Arg mutation is a highly conserved residue and causes an increase in protein stability. It had an important influence on not only amino acid size, charge and hydrophobicity but also protein intermolecular hydrogen bonding and spatial structure. There were differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in GSE40585 dataset. Enrichment analysis revealed that DEGs mainly functioned in amino acid metabolism, signal transduction and dephosphorylation. We reported a novel mutation c.2421C>G (p.Ser807Arg in WFS1. This study expands the mutation spectrum of WFS1.

Spectrum of Genes for Non-GJB2-Related Non-Syndromic Hearing Loss in the Russian Population Revealed by a Targeted Deafness Gene Panel

Hearing loss is one of the most genetically heterogeneous disorders known. Over 120 genes are reportedly associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL). To date, in Russia, there have been relatively few studies that apply massive parallel sequencing (MPS) methods to elucidate the genetic factors underlying non-GJB2-related hearing loss cases. The current study is intended to provide an understanding of the mutation spectrum in non-GJB2-related hearing loss in a cohort of Russian sensorineural NSHL patients and establish the best diagnostic algorithm. Genetic testing using an MPS panel, which included 33 NSHL and syndromic hearing loss (SHL) genes that might be misdiagnosed as NSHL genes, was completed on 226 sequentially accrued and unrelated patients. As a result, the molecular basis of deafness was found in 21% of the non-GJB2 NSHL cases. The total contribution pathogenic, and likely pathogenic, variants in the genes studied among all hereditary NSHL Russian patients was 12%. STRC pathogenic and likely pathogenic, variants accounted for 30% of diagnoses in GJB2-negative patients, providing the most common diagnosis. The majority of causative mutations in STRC involved large copy number variants (CNVs) (80%). Among the point mutations, the most common were c.11864G>A (p.Trp3955*) in the USH2A gene, c.2171_2174delTTTG (p.Val724Glyfs*6) in the STRC gene, and c.107A>C (p.His36Pro) and c.1001G>T (p.Gly334Val) in the SLC26A4 gene. Pathogenic variants in genes involved in SHL accounted for almost half of the cases with an established molecular genetic diagnosis, which were 10% of the total cohort of patients with non-GJB2-related hearing loss.

Addition of an affected family member to a previously ascertained autosomal recessive nonsyndromic hearing loss pedigree and systematic phenotype-genotype analysis of splice-site variants in MYO15A

Pathogenic variants in MYO15A are known to cause autosomal recessive nonsyndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL), DFNB3. We have previously reported on one ARNSHL family including two affected siblings and identified MYO15A c.5964+3G > A and c.8375 T > C (p.Val2792Ala) as the possible deafness-causing variants. Eight year follow up identified one new affected individual in this family, who also showed congenital, severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. By whole exome sequencing, we identified a new splice-site variant c.5531+1G > C (maternal allele), in a compound heterozygote with previously identified missense variant c.8375 T > C (p.Val2792Ala) (paternal allele) in MYO15A as the disease-causing variants. The new affected individual underwent unilateral cochlear implantation at the age of 1 year, and 5 year follow-up showed satisfactory speech and language outcomes. Our results further indicate that MYO15A-associated hearing loss is good candidates for cochlear implantation, which is in accordance with previous report. In light of our findings and review of the literatures, 58 splice-site variants in MYO15A are correlated with a severe deafness phenotype, composed of 46 canonical splice-site variants and 12 non-canonical splice-site variants.

Next-generation sequencing facilitates genetic diagnosis and improves the management of patients with hearing loss in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss (HL) is a prevalent sensorineural disorder, and is among the most etiologically heterogeneous disorders. With the advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, hundreds of candidate genes can be analyzed simultaneously in a cost-effective manner.

METHODS

Ninety-four patients from 87 families diagnosed with non-syndromic or syndromic HL were enrolled. A custom-designed HL panel and clinical exome sequencing (CES) were applied to explore molecular etiology in the cohort, and the efficacy of the two panels was examined.

RESULTS

The etiologic diagnosis for HL has been identified for 36 out of 87 probands (41.4%), 28 with an autosomal recessive (AR) inheritance pattern and 8 with an autosomal dominant (AD) pattern. Candidate variants in 18 different genes were identified in the study cohort, 10 with AR inheritance pattern and 8 with AD pattern. Fourteen of the variants identified in the study were novel.

CONCLUSIONS

The custom-designed HL panel covers almost all known HL-associated genes, and can be used as an effective clinical diagnostic platform; CES evaluates all exons related to clinical symptoms, and is also suitable for clinical diagnosis of HL. Next-generation sequencing facilitates genetic diagnosis and improves the management of patients with HL in the clinical practice.

Outcomes of Gene Panel Testing for Sensorineural Hearing Loss in a Diverse Patient Cohort

IMPORTANCE

A genetic diagnosis can help elucidate the prognosis of hearing loss, thus significantly affecting management. Previous studies on diagnostic yield of hearing loss genetic tests have been based on largely homogenous study populations.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the diagnostic yield of genetic testing in a diverse population of children, accounting for sociodemographic and patient characteristics, and assess whether these diagnoses are associated with subsequent changes in clinical management.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study included 2075 patients seen at the Children's Communications Clinic, of whom 517 completed hearing loss gene panel testing between January 1, 2015, and November 1, 2021, at the University of California, San Francisco Benioff Children's Hospital system. From those 517 patients, 426 children with at least 2 audiograms were identified and analyzed. Data were gathered from November 2021 to January 2022 and analyzed from January to February 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The measures of interest were sociodemographic characteristics (age at testing, gender, race and ethnicity, primary language, and insurance type), hearing loss characteristics, and medical variables. The outcome was genetic testing results. Variables were compared with univariate and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 2075 patients seen at the Children's Communications Clinic, 517 (median [range] age, 8 [0-31] years; 264 [51.1%] male; 351 [67.9%] from an underrepresented minority [URM] group) underwent a hearing loss panel genetic test between January 1, 2015, and November 1, 2021. Among those 517 patients, 426 children (median [range] age, 8 [0-18] years; 221 [51.9%] male; 304 [71.4%] from an URM group) with 2 or more audiograms were included in a subsequent analysis. On multivariable logistic regression, age at testing (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78-0.97), URM group status (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.66), comorbidities (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14-0.53), late-identified hearing loss (passed newborn hearing screen; OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.08-0.86), and unilateral hearing loss (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.005-0.33) were the only factors associated with genetic diagnosis. No association was found between genetic diagnosis yield and other sociodemographic variables or hearing loss characteristics. Patients in URM and non-URM groups had statistically similar clinical features. A total of 32 of 109 children (29.4%) who received a genetic diagnosis received diagnoses that significantly affected prognosis because of identification of syndromic or progressive sensorineural hearing loss or auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder relating to otoferlin.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study's findings suggest that genetic testing may be broadly useful in improving clinical management of children with hearing loss. More research is warranted to discover and characterize diagnostic genes for those who have been historically underrepresented in research and medicine.

Extended genetic diagnostics for children with profound sensorineural hearing loss by implementing massive parallel sequencing. Diagnostic outcome, family experience and clinical implementation

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate genetic outcomes, analyze the family experience, and describe the process of implementing genetic sequencing for children with profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) at a tertial audiological center in southern Sweden.

DESIGN

This is a prospective pilot study including eleven children with profound bilateral SNHL who underwent cochlear implant surgery. Genetic diagnostic investigation was performed with whole exome sequencing (WES) complemented with XON-array to identify copy number variants, using a manually curated gene panel incorporating 179 genes associated with non-syndromic and syndromic SNHL. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from blood was examined separately. A patient reported experience measures (PREM) questionnaire was used to evaluate parental experience. We also describe here the process of implementing WES in an audiology department.

RESULTS

Six female and five male children (mean 3.4 years, SD 3.5 years), with profound bilateral SNHL were included. Genetic variants of interest were found in six subjects (55%), where three (27%) could be classified as pathogenic or likely pathogenic. Among the six cases, one child was found to have a homozygous pathogenic variant in MYO7A and two children had homozygous likely pathogenic variants in SLC26A4 and PCDH15, respectively. One was carrying a compound heterozygote frameshift variant of uncertain significance (VUS) on one allele and in trans, a likely pathogenic deletion on the other allele in PCDH15. Two subjects had homozygous VUS in PCDH15 and ADGRV1, respectively. In five of the cases the variants were in genes associated with Usher syndrome. For one of the likely pathogenic variants, the finding was related to Pendred syndrome. No mtDNA variants related to SNHL were found. The PREM questionnaire revealed that the families had difficulty in fully understanding the results of the genetic analysis. However, the parents of all eleven (100%) subjects still recommended that other families with children with SNHL should undergo genetic testing. Specifically addressed referrals for prompt complementary clinical examination and more individualized care were possible, based on the genetic results. Close clinical collaboration between different specialists, including physicians of audiology, audiologists, clinical geneticists, ophthalmologists, pediatricians, otoneurologists, physiotherapists and hearing habilitation teams was initiated during the implementation of the new regime. For all professionals involved, a better knowledge of the diversity of the genetic background of hearing loss was achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Whole exome sequencing and XON-array using a panel of genes associated with SNHL had a high diagnostic yield, added value to the families, and provided guidance for further examinations and habilitation for the child. Great care should be taken to thoroughly inform parents about the genetic test result. Collaborations between departments were intensified and knowledge of hearing genomics was increased among the staff.

Searching for the Molecular Basis of Partial Deafness

Hearing is an important human sense for communicating and connecting with others. Partial deafness (PD) is a common hearing problem, in which there is a down-sloping audiogram. In this study, we apply a practical system for classifying PD patients, used for treatment purposes, to distinguish two groups of patients: one with almost normal hearing thresholds at low frequencies (PDT-EC, n = 20), and a second group with poorer thresholds at those same low frequencies (PDT-EAS, n = 20). After performing comprehensive genetic testing with a panel of 237 genes, we found that genetic factors can explain a significant proportion of both PDT-EC and PDT-EAS hearing losses, accounting, respectively, for approx. one-fifth and one-half of all the cases in our cohort. Most of the causative variants were located in dominant and recessive genes previously linked to PD, but more than half of the variants were novel. Among the contributors to PDT-EC we identified OSBPL2 and SYNE4, two relatively new hereditary hearing loss genes with a low publication profile. Our study revealed that, for all PD patients, a postlingual hearing loss more severe in the low-frequency range is associated with a higher detection rate of causative variants. Isolating a genetic cause of PD is important in terms of prognosis, therapeutic effectiveness, and risk of recurrence.

Genetic etiology of non-syndromic hearing loss in Europe

Hearing impairment not etiologically associated with clinical signs in other organs (non-syndromic) is genetically heterogeneous, so that over 120 genes are currently known to be involved. The frequency of mutations in each gene and the most frequent mutations vary throughout populations. Here we review the genetic etiology of non-syndromic hearing impairment (NSHI) in Europe. Over the years, epidemiological data were scarce because of the large number of involved genes, whose screening was not cost-effective until implementation of massively parallel DNA sequencing. In Europe, the most common form of autosomal recessive NSHI is DFNB1, which accounts for 11-57% of the cases. Mutations in STRC account for 16% of the recessive cases, and only a few more (MYO15A, MYO7A, LOXHD1, USH2A, TMPRSS3, CDH23, TMC1, OTOF, OTOA, SLC26A4, ADGRV1 and TECTA) have contributions higher than 2%. As regards autosomal-dominant NSHI, DFNA22 (MYO6) and DFNA8/12 (TECTA) represent the most common forms, accounting for 21% and 18% of elucidated cases, respectively. The contribution of ACTG1 and WFS1 drops to 9% in both cases, followed by POU4F3 (6.5%), MYO7A (5%), MYH14 and COL11A2 (4% each). Four additional genes contribute 2.5% each one (MITF, KCNQ4, EYA4, SOX10) and the remaining are residually represented. X-linked hearing loss and maternally-inherited NSHI have minor contributions in most countries. Further knowledge on the genetic epidemiology of NSHI in Europe needs a standardization of the experimental approaches and a stratification of the results according to clinical features, familial history and patterns of inheritance, to facilitate comparison between studies.

Concurrent newborn hearing and genetic screening of common hearing loss variants with bloodspot-based targeted next generation sequencing in Jiangxi province

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Concurrent hearing and genetic screening of newborns have been widely adopted as an effective strategy in early diagnosis and intervention for hearing loss in many cities in China. Here, we aimed to firstly explore the efficacy of combining conventional hearing screening with genetic screening among the large-scale newborns in Jiangxi Province.

METHODS

A total of 24,349 newborns from Jiangxi Maternal and Child Health Hospital were enrolled in our study from April 2021 to June 2022. Newborn hearing screening was conducted using otoacoustic emission (OAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR). Meanwhile, newborn dried blood spots were collected and twenty common variants in four genes, including GJB2, SLC26A4, MT-RNR1(12SrRNA), and GJB3, were screened using a BGISEQ-500 next generation sequencing platform. Whole coding regions sequencing of GJB2 and SLC26A4 were performed by Sanger sequencing and NGS, respectively. Following up of hearing for the newborns was undertaken by phone interviews.

RESULTS

Among the 24,349 newborns, 7.00% (1,704/24,349) were bilaterally or unilaterally referred in their initial hearing screening, whereas 1.30% (316/24,349) exhibited bilateral or unilateral hearing loss in the repeated screening. Genetic screening revealed that 4.813% (1,172/24,349) of the screened newborns were positive for at least one mutant allele (heterozygote, homozygote, or compound heterozygote in one gene, mtDNA homoplasmy or heteroplasmy and combined variants in different genes). A total of 1,146 individuals were identified with mutant allele in one gene, including 525 of GJB2, 371 of SLC26A4, 189 as homoplasmic or heteroplasmic of MT-RNR1, and 61 of GJB3, indicating that GJB2 and SLC26A4 are the most common endemic deafness-associated genes among newborns in Jiangxi Province. Nineteen newborns were detected with combined heterozygous variants in different genes, with "c.235delC heterozygous and c.919-2A > G heterozygous" as the most prevalent genotype. Additionally, seven newborns were screened as homozygotes or compound heterozygotes responsible for congenital or late-onset prelingual hearing loss, including three cases with GJB2 c.235delC homozygous and one with SLC26A4 c.919-2A > G homozygous variant, one case with compound heterozygous variants for GJB2 and two with compound heterozygous variants for SLC26A4. Coding regions sequencing of GJB2 or SLC26A4 for overall 265 infants revealed that 14 individuals were identified as compound heterozygote with a second pathogenic variant not screened by our genetic panel.

CONCLUSIONS

Herein our study firstly investigated the efficacy of concurrent hearing screening and genetic screening of common hearing impairment variants among large-scale newborns in Jiangxi Province. Concurrent screening provides a more comprehensive approach for management of congenital or delayed onset prelingual hearing loss and prevention of drug-induced hearing impairment for newborns at risk as well as their maternal relatives. An insight into the molecular epidemiology for hearing loss genes among Jiangxi population will also be beneficial to the genetic counseling and birth defect prevention.

Prevalence and Characteristics of STRC Gene Mutations (DFNB16): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Mutations in the STRC (MIM 606440) gene, inducing DFNB16, are considered a major cause of mild–moderate autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the global prevalence and characteristics of STRC variations, important information required for genetic counseling.

Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for relevant articles published before January 2021.

Results: The pooled prevalence of DFNB16 in GJB2-negative patients with hearing loss was 4.08% (95% CI: 0.0289–0.0573), and the proportion of STRC variants in the mild–moderate hearing loss group was 14.36%. Monoallelic mutations of STRC were 4.84% (95% CI: 0.0343–0.0680) in patients with deafness (non-GJB2) and 1.36% (95% CI: 0.0025–0.0696) in people with normal hearing. The DFNB16 prevalence in genetically confirmed patients (non-GJB2) was 11.10% (95% CI: 0.0716–0.1682). Overall pooled prevalence of deafness–infertility syndrome (DIS) was 36.75% (95% CI: 0.2122–0.5563) in DFNB16. The prevalence of biallelic deletions in STRC gene mutations was 70.85% (95% CI: 0.5824–0.8213).

Conclusion: Variants in the STRC gene significantly contribute to mild–moderate hearing impairment. Moreover, biallelic deletions are a main feature of STRC mutations. Copy number variations associated with infertility should be seriously considered when investigating DFNB16.

The genetic etiology of hearing loss in Japan revealed by the social health insurance-based genetic testing of 10K patients

Etiological studies have shown genetic disorders to be a major cause of sensorineural hearing loss, but there are a limited number of comprehensive etiological reports based on genetic analysis. In the present study, the same platform using a diagnostic DNA panel carrying 63 deafness genes and the same filtering algorithm were applied to 10,047 samples obtained from social health insurance-based genetic testing of hearing loss. The most remarkable result obtained in this comprehensive study was that the data first clarified the genetic epidemiology from congenital/early-onset deafness to late-onset hearing loss. The overall diagnostic rate was 38.8%, with the rate differing for each age group; 48.6% for the congenital/early-onset group (~5y.o.), 33.5% for the juvenile/young adult-onset group, and 18.0% for the 40+ y.o. group. Interestingly, each group showed a different kind of causative gene. With regard to the mutational spectra, there are certain recurrent variants that may be due to founder effects or hot spots. A series of haplotype studies have shown many recurrent variants are due to founder effects, which is compatible with human migration. It should be noted that, regardless of differences in the mutational spectrum, the clinical characteristics caused by particular genes can be considered universal. This comprehensive review clarified the detailed clinical characteristics (onset age, severity, progressiveness, etc.) of hearing loss caused by each gene, and will provide useful information for future clinical application, including genetic counseling and selection of appropriate interventions.

Hearing Screening Combined with Target Gene Panel Testing Increased Etiological Diagnostic Yield in Deaf Children

Genetic testing is the gold standard for exploring the etiology of congenital hearing loss. Here, we enrolled 137 Chinese patients with congenital hearing loss to describe the molecular epidemiology by using 127 gene panel testing or 159 variant testing. Sixty-three deaf children received 127 gene panel testing, while seventy-four patients received 159 variant testing. By use of 127 gene panel testing, more mutant genes and variants were identified. The most frequent mutant genes were GJB2, SLC26A4, MYO15A, CDH23, and OTOF. By analyzing the patients who received 127 gene panel testing, we found that 51 deaf children carried variants which were not included in 159 variant testing. Therefore, a large number of patients would be misdiagnosed if only 159 variant testing is used. This study highlights the advantage of 127 gene panel testing, and it suggests that broader genetic testing should be done to identify the genetic etiology of congenital hearing loss.