Development and Validation of Clinical Whole-Exome and Whole-Genome Sequencing for Detection of Germline Variants in Inherited Disease.

CONTEXT - With the decrease in the cost of sequencing, the clinical testing paradigm has shifted from single gene to gene panel and now whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing. Clinical laboratories are rapidly implementing next-generation sequencing-based whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing. Because a large number of targets are covered by whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing, it is critical that a laboratory perform appropriate validation studies, develop a quality assurance and quality control program, and participate in proficiency testing. OBJECTIVE - To provide recommendations for whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing assay design, validation, and implementation for the detection of germline variants associated in inherited disorders. DATA SOURCES - An example of trio sequencing, filtration and annotation of variants, and phenotypic consideration to arrive at clinical diagnosis is discussed. CONCLUSIONS - It is critical that clinical laboratories planning to implement whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing design and validate the assay to specifications and ensure adequate performance prior to implementation. Test design specifications, including variant filtering and annotation, phenotypic consideration, guidance on consenting options, and reporting of incidental findings, are provided. These are important steps a laboratory must take to validate and implement whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing in a clinical setting for germline variants in inherited disorders.

[1]  Nigel Collier,et al.  Automatic concept recognition using the Human Phenotype Ontology reference and test suite corpora , 2015, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[2]  W. Kibbe,et al.  Review of Current Methods, Applications, and Data Management for the Bioinformatics Analysis of Whole Exome Sequencing , 2014, Cancer informatics.

[3]  Lora J. H. Bean,et al.  Regulating whole exome sequencing as a diagnostic test , 2016, Human Genetics.

[4]  P. Robinson,et al.  The Human Phenotype Ontology: a tool for annotating and analyzing human hereditary disease. , 2008, American journal of human genetics.

[5]  Andrew J. Hill,et al.  Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans , 2015, bioRxiv.

[6]  S. Kingsmore.  Newborn testing and screening by whole-genome sequencing , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[7]  Christian Gilissen,et al.  Unlocking Mendelian disease using exome sequencing , 2011, Genome Biology.

[8]  Shashikant Kulkarni,et al.  Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practice , 2012, Nature Biotechnology.

[9]  Karynne E. Patterson,et al.  The Genetic Basis of Mendelian Phenotypes: Discoveries, Challenges, and Opportunities. , 2015, American journal of human genetics.

[10]  Damian Smedley,et al.  Improved exome prioritization of disease genes through cross-species phenotype comparison , 2014, Genome research.

[11]  J. Lupski,et al.  De novo truncating mutations in ASXL3 are associated with a novel clinical phenotype with similarities to Bohring-Opitz syndrome , 2013, Genome Medicine.

[12]  Alan F. Scott,et al.  Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), a knowledgebase of human genes and genetic disorders , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Giorgio Valentini,et al.  A Whole-Genome Analysis Framework for Effective Identification of Pathogenic Regulatory Variants in Mendelian Disease. , 2016, American journal of human genetics.

[14]  D. G. MacArthur,et al.  Guidelines for investigating causality of sequence variants in human disease , 2014, Nature.

[15]  Joshua L. Deignan,et al.  ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[16]  W. Chung,et al.  Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics , 2016, Genetics in Medicine.

[17]  Andrew J. Grimm,et al.  Interpreting missense variants: comparing computational methods in human disease genes CDKN2A, MLH1, MSH2, MECP2, and tyrosinase (TYR) , 2007, Human mutation.

[18]  Lora J. H. Bean,et al.  Free the Data: One Laboratory's Approach to Knowledge‐Based Genomic Variant Classification and Preparation for EMR Integration of Genomic Data , 2013, Human mutation.

[19]  Lora J. H. Bean,et al.  Gene Variant Databases and Sharing: Creating a Global Genomic Variant Database for Personalized Medicine , 2016, Human mutation.

[20]  Laurie D. Smith,et al.  Rapid whole genome sequencing and precision neonatology. , 2015, Seminars in perinatology.

[21]  M. Hegde,et al.  Gamut of genetic testing for neonatal care. , 2015, Clinics in perinatology.

[22]  Xiang Li,et al.  Enhanced utility of family-centered diagnostic exome sequencing with inheritance model–based analysis: results from 500 unselected families with undiagnosed genetic conditions , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[23]  W. Grody,et al.  ACMG recommendations for standards for interpretation and reporting of sequence variations: Revisions 2007 , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[24]  Damian Smedley,et al.  PhenoDigm: analyzing curated annotations to associate animal models with human diseases , 2013, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[25]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. , 2014, JAMA.

[26]  L. Vissers,et al.  Genome sequencing identifies major causes of severe intellectual disability , 2014, Nature.

[27]  S. Mundlos,et al.  Comparison of Exome and Genome Sequencing Technologies for the Complete Capture of Protein‐Coding Regions , 2015, Human mutation.

[28]  Eric Vilain,et al.  Assessing the necessity of confirmatory testing for exome sequencing results in a clinical molecular diagnostic laboratory , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[29]  Paolo Rocco,et al.  Good laboratory practice for clinical next-generation sequencing informatics pipelines , 2015 .

[30]  Eric Vilain,et al.  Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. , 2014, JAMA.

[31]  G. Abecasis,et al.  Detecting and estimating contamination of human DNA samples in sequencing and array-based genotype data. , 2012, American journal of human genetics.

[32]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  S. Kingsmore,et al.  Utility of Next Generation Sequencing in Clinical Primary Immunodeficiencies , 2014, Current Allergy and Asthma Reports.

[34]  Marc S. Williams,et al.  ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[35]  Laurie D. Smith,et al.  De novo frameshift mutation in ASXL3 in a patient with global developmental delay, microcephaly, and craniofacial anomalies , 2013, BMC Medical Genomics.

[36]  J. McPherson,et al.  Coming of age: ten years of next-generation sequencing technologies , 2016, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[37]  Yuan Xue,et al.  Solving the molecular diagnostic testing conundrum for Mendelian disorders in the era of next-generation sequencing: single-gene, gene panel, or exome/genome sequencing , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[38]  L. Ross,et al.  Reporting Incidental Findings in Genomic Scale Clinical Sequencing-A Clinical Laboratory Perspective: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology. , 2015, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[39]  Laura M. Jackson,et al.  Finding Our Way through Phenotypes , 2015, PLoS biology.

[40]  J. Shendure,et al.  A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants , 2014, Nature Genetics.

[41]  Christian Gilissen,et al.  Novel bioinformatic developments for exome sequencing , 2016, Human Genetics.