Genetic diagnosis of developmental disorders in the DDD study: a scalable analysis of genome-wide research data

Summary Background Human genome sequencing has transformed our understanding of genomic variation and its relevance to health and disease, and is now starting to enter clinical practice for the diagnosis of rare diseases. The question of whether and how some categories of genomic findings should be shared with individual research participants is currently a topic of international debate, and development of robust analytical workflows to identify and communicate clinically relevant variants is paramount. Methods The Deciphering Developmental Disorders (DDD) study has developed a UK-wide patient recruitment network involving over 180 clinicians across all 24 regional genetics services, and has performed genome-wide microarray and whole exome sequencing on children with undiagnosed developmental disorders and their parents. After data analysis, pertinent genomic variants were returned to individual research participants via their local clinical genetics team. Findings Around 80 000 genomic variants were identified from exome sequencing and microarray analysis in each individual, of which on average 400 were rare and predicted to be protein altering. By focusing only on de novo and segregating variants in known developmental disorder genes, we achieved a diagnostic yield of 27% among 1133 previously investigated yet undiagnosed children with developmental disorders, whilst minimising incidental findings. In families with developmentally normal parents, whole exome sequencing of the child and both parents resulted in a 10-fold reduction in the number of potential causal variants that needed clinical evaluation compared to sequencing only the child. Most diagnostic variants identified in known genes were novel and not present in current databases of known disease variation. Interpretation Implementation of a robust translational genomics workflow is achievable within a large-scale rare disease research study to allow feedback of potentially diagnostic findings to clinicians and research participants. Systematic recording of relevant clinical data, curation of a gene–phenotype knowledge base, and development of clinical decision support software are needed in addition to automated exclusion of almost all variants, which is crucial for scalable prioritisation and review of possible diagnostic variants. However, the resource requirements of development and maintenance of a clinical reporting system within a research setting are substantial. Funding Health Innovation Challenge Fund, a parallel funding partnership between the Wellcome Trust and the UK Department of Health.

[1]  Muin J Khoury,et al.  Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: Meeting the challenge one bin at a time , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[2]  Robert C. Green,et al.  Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[3]  Jennifer D. Churchill,et al.  Exome-based mapping and variant prioritization for inherited Mendelian disorders. , 2014, American journal of human genetics.

[4]  Tomas W. Fitzgerald,et al.  Large-scale discovery of novel genetic causes of developmental disorders , 2014, Nature.

[5]  Jana Marie Schwarz,et al.  MutationTaster evaluates disease-causing potential of sequence alterations , 2010, Nature Methods.

[6]  Claire Redin,et al.  XLID-causing mutations and associated genes challenged in light of data from large-scale human exome sequencing. , 2013, American journal of human genetics.

[7]  Christian Gilissen,et al.  A de novo paradigm for mental retardation , 2010, Nature Genetics.

[8]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm , 2009, Nature Protocols.

[9]  M. Hurles,et al.  Empirical research on the ethics of genomic research , 2013, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[10]  Emily H Turner,et al.  Actionable, pathogenic incidental findings in 1,000 participants' exomes. , 2013, American journal of human genetics.

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

[12]  W P Robinson,et al.  Mechanisms leading to uniparental disomy and their clinical consequences , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[13]  D. Horn,et al.  Range of genetic mutations associated with severe non-syndromic sporadic intellectual disability: an exome sequencing study , 2012, The Lancet.

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

[15]  Caroline F. Wright,et al.  DECIPHER: database for the interpretation of phenotype-linked plausibly pathogenic sequence and copy-number variation , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

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

[17]  E. Birney,et al.  Policy challenges of clinical genome sequencing , 2013, BMJ.

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

[19]  M. DePristo,et al.  The Genome Analysis Toolkit: a MapReduce framework for analyzing next-generation DNA sequencing data. , 2010, Genome research.

[20]  Arthur Wuster,et al.  DeNovoGear: de novo indel and point mutation discovery and phasing , 2013, Nature Methods.

[21]  D. Goldstein,et al.  Genic Intolerance to Functional Variation and the Interpretation of Personal Genomes , 2013, PLoS genetics.

[22]  Tomas W. Fitzgerald,et al.  A novel method for detecting uniparental disomy from trio genotypes identifies a significant excess in children with developmental disorders , 2014, Genome research.

[23]  Charles A. Nelson,et al.  The incidentalome. , 2006, JAMA.

[24]  M. Hurles,et al.  No expectation to share incidental findings in genomic research , 2015, The Lancet.

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

[26]  Sylvia Stockler,et al.  Treatable inborn errors of metabolism causing intellectual disability: a systematic literature review. , 2012, Molecular genetics and metabolism.

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

[28]  R. Durbin,et al.  Dindel: accurate indel calls from short-read data. , 2011, Genome research.

[29]  R. Altman,et al.  The incidentalome: a threat to genomic medicine. , 2006, JAMA.

[30]  B. V. van Bon,et al.  Diagnostic exome sequencing in persons with severe intellectual disability. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  Soma Das,et al.  Exome sequencing and the genetics of intellectual disability , 2011, Clinical genetics.

[32]  David P Bick,et al.  Making a definitive diagnosis: Successful clinical application of whole exome sequencing in a child with intractable inflammatory bowel disease , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[33]  Gonçalo R. Abecasis,et al.  The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools , 2009, Bioinform..

[34]  Jay Shendure,et al.  Exome sequencing in sporadic autism spectrum disorders identifies severe de novo mutations , 2012, Nature Genetics.

[35]  B. Berkman,et al.  Do Researchers Have an Obligation to Actively Look for Genetic Incidental Findings? , 2013, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[36]  P. Stankiewicz,et al.  Whole-genome sequencing in a patient with Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[37]  P. Bork,et al.  A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations , 2010, Nature Methods.

[38]  H. Firth,et al.  The Deciphering Developmental Disorders (DDD) study , 2011, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[39]  C. Shaw-Smith,et al.  Array CGH in patients with learning disability (mental retardation) and congenital anomalies: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 studies and 13,926 subjects , 2009, Genetics in Medicine.

[40]  J. Shendure,et al.  Exome sequencing as a tool for Mendelian disease gene discovery , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[41]  S. Mundlos,et al.  The Human Phenotype Ontology , 2010, Clinical genetics.

[42]  M. Rieder,et al.  Exome sequencing in sporadic autism spectrum disorders identifies severe de novo mutations , 2011, Nature Genetics.

[43]  R. Reading,et al.  Diagnostic exome sequencing in persons with severe intellectual disability , 2013 .

[44]  Daniel Rios,et al.  Bioinformatics Applications Note Databases and Ontologies Deriving the Consequences of Genomic Variants with the Ensembl Api and Snp Effect Predictor , 2022 .