@article {792, title = {Quantitative Assessment of Parental Somatic Mosaicism for Copy-Number Variant (CNV) Deletions.}, journal = {Curr Protoc Hum Genet}, volume = {106}, year = {2020}, month = {2020 06}, pages = {e99}, abstract = {

As genome sequencing methodologies have become more sensitive in detecting low-frequency rare-variant events, the link between post-zygotic mutagenesis and somatic mosaicism in the etiology of several human genetic conditions other than cancers has become more clear. Given that current clinical-genomics diagnostic methods have limited detection sensitivity for mosaic events, a copy-number variant (CNV) deletion inherited from a parent with low-level (<10\%) mosaicism can be erroneously interpreted in the proband to represent a de novo germline event. Here, we describe three sensitive, precise, and cost-efficient methods that can quantitatively assess the potential degree of parental somatic mosaicism levels for CNV deletions: droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), PCR amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS), and quantitative PCR. ddPCR using the EvaGreen fluorescent dye protocol can specifically quantify the deleted or non-deleted alleles by analyzing the number of droplets positive for a fluorescent signal for each event. PCR amplicon-based NGS assesses the allele frequencies of a heterozygous single-nucleotide polymorphism within a deletion region. The difference in number of reads between the two genotypes indicates the level of somatic mosaicism for the CNV deletion. Quantitative PCR can be applied where the relative quantity of the deletion junction-specific product represents the level of mosaicism. Clinical implementation of these quantitative variant-detection methods enables potentially more accurate assessment of disease recurrence risk in family-based genetic counseling, allowing couples to engage in more informed family planning. {\textcopyright} 2020 by John Wiley \& Sons, Inc. Basic Protocol: Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) Alternate Protocol 1: PCR amplicon-based next-generation sequencing Alternate Protocol 2: Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR).

}, keywords = {DNA Copy Number Variations, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, Humans, Mosaicism, Parents, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction}, issn = {1934-8258}, doi = {10.1002/cphg.99}, author = {Liu, Qian and Grochowski, Christopher M and Bi, Weimin and Lupski, James R and Stankiewicz, Pawe{\l}} } @article {673, title = {Reanalysis of Clinical Exome Sequencing Data.}, journal = {N Engl J Med}, volume = {380}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 06 20}, pages = {2478-2480}, keywords = {Exome, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Genetic Testing, Humans, Mutation, Phenotype, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Whole Exome Sequencing}, issn = {1533-4406}, doi = {10.1056/NEJMc1812033}, author = {Liu, Pengfei and Meng, Linyan and Normand, Elizabeth A and Xia, Fan and Song, Xiaofei and Ghazi, Andrew and Rosenfeld, Jill and Magoulas, Pilar L and Braxton, Alicia and Ward, Patricia and Dai, Hongzheng and Yuan, Bo and Bi, Weimin and Xiao, Rui and Wang, Xia and Chiang, Theodore and Vetrini, Francesco and He, Weimin and Cheng, Hanyin and Dong, Jie and Gijavanekar, Charul and Benke, Paul J and Bernstein, Jonathan A and Eble, Tanya and Eroglu, Yasemen and Erwin, Deanna and Escobar, Luis and Gibson, James B and Gripp, Karen and Kleppe, Soledad and Koenig, Mary K and Lewis, Andrea M and Natowicz, Marvin and Mancias, Pedro and Minor, LaKeesha and Scaglia, Fernando and Schaaf, Christian P and Streff, Haley and Vernon, Hilary and Uhles, Crescenda L and Zackai, Elaine H and Wu, Nan and Sutton, V Reid and Beaudet, Arthur L and Muzny, Donna and Gibbs, Richard A and Posey, Jennifer E and Lalani, Seema and Shaw, Chad and Eng, Christine M and Lupski, James R and Yang, Yaping} } @article {376, title = {Identification of novel candidate disease genes from de novo exonic copy number variants.}, journal = {Genome Med}, volume = {9}, year = {2017}, month = {2017 09 21}, pages = {83}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Exon-targeted microarrays can detect small (<1000~bp) intragenic copy number variants (CNVs), including those that affect only a single exon. This genome-wide high-sensitivity approach increases the molecular diagnosis for conditions with known disease-associated genes, enables better genotype-phenotype correlations, and facilitates variant allele detection allowing novel disease gene discovery.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 63,127 patients referred for clinical chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) at Baylor Genetics laboratories, including 46,755 individuals tested using exon-targeted arrays, from 2007 to 2017. Small CNVs harboring a single gene or two to five non-disease-associated genes were identified; the genes involved were evaluated for a potential disease association.

RESULTS: In this clinical population, among rare CNVs involving any single gene reported in 7200 patients (11\%), we identified 145 de novo autosomal CNVs (117 losses and 28 intragenic gains), 257 X-linked deletion CNVs in males, and 1049 inherited autosomal CNVs (878 losses and 171 intragenic gains); 111 known disease genes were potentially disrupted by de novo autosomal or X-linked (in males) single-gene CNVs. Ninety-one genes, either recently proposed as candidate disease genes or not yet associated with diseases, were disrupted by 147 single-gene CNVs, including 37 de novo deletions and ten de novo intragenic duplications on autosomes and 100 X-linked CNVs in males. Clinical features in individuals with de novo or X-linked CNVs encompassing at most five genes (224~bp to 1.6~Mb in size) were compared to those in individuals with larger-sized deletions (up to 5~Mb in size) in the internal CMA database or loss-of-function single nucleotide variants (SNVs) detected by clinical or research whole-exome sequencing (WES). This enabled the identification of recently published genes (BPTF, NONO, PSMD12, TANGO2, and TRIP12), novel candidate disease genes (ARGLU1 and STK3), and further confirmation of disease association for two recently proposed disease genes (MEIS2 and PTCHD1). Notably, exon-targeted CMA detected several pathogenic single-exon CNVs missed by clinical WES analyses.

CONCLUSIONS: Together, these data document the efficacy of exon-targeted CMA for detection of genic and exonic CNVs, complementing and extending WES in clinical diagnostics, and the potential for discovery of novel disease genes by genome-wide assay.

}, keywords = {Cohort Studies, DNA Copy Number Variations, Exons, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Genome, Human, Homeodomain Proteins, Humans, Intracellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins, Membrane Proteins, Neurodevelopmental Disorders, Protein-Serine-Threonine Kinases, Retrospective Studies, Transcription Factors, Whole Genome Sequencing}, issn = {1756-994X}, doi = {10.1186/s13073-017-0472-7}, author = {Gambin, Tomasz and Yuan, Bo and Bi, Weimin and Liu, Pengfei and Rosenfeld, Jill A and Coban-Akdemir, Zeynep and Pursley, Amber N and Nagamani, Sandesh C S and Marom, Ronit and Golla, Sailaja and Dengle, Lauren and Petrie, Heather G and Matalon, Reuben and Emrick, Lisa and Proud, Monica B and Treadwell-Deering, Diane and Chao, Hsiao-Tuan and Koillinen, Hannele and Brown, Chester and Urraca, Nora and Mostafavi, Roya and Bernes, Saunder and Roeder, Elizabeth R and Nugent, Kimberly M and Bader, Patricia I and Bellus, Gary and Cummings, Michael and Northrup, Hope and Ashfaq, Myla and Westman, Rachel and Wildin, Robert and Beck, Anita E and Immken, LaDonna and Elton, Lindsay and Varghese, Shaun and Buchanan, Edward and Faivre, Laurence and Lefebvre, Mathilde and Schaaf, Christian P and Walkiewicz, Magdalena and Yang, Yaping and Kang, Sung-Hae L and Lalani, Seema R and Bacino, Carlos A and Beaudet, Arthur L and Breman, Amy M and Smith, Janice L and Cheung, Sau Wai and Lupski, James R and Patel, Ankita and Shaw, Chad A and Stankiewicz, Pawe{\l}} } @article {357, title = {Lessons learned from additional research analyses of unsolved clinical exome cases.}, journal = {Genome Med}, volume = {9}, year = {2017}, month = {2017 03 21}, pages = {26}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Given the rarity of most single-gene Mendelian disorders, concerted efforts of data exchange between clinical and scientific communities are critical to optimize molecular diagnosis and novel disease gene discovery.

METHODS: We designed and implemented protocols for the study of cases for which a plausible molecular diagnosis was not achieved in a clinical genomics diagnostic laboratory (i.e. unsolved clinical exomes). Such cases were recruited to a research laboratory for further analyses, in order to potentially: (1) accelerate novel disease gene discovery; (2) increase the molecular diagnostic yield of whole exome sequencing (WES); and (3) gain insight into the genetic mechanisms of disease. Pilot project data included 74 families, consisting mostly of parent-offspring trios. Analyses performed on a research basis employed both WES from additional family members and complementary bioinformatics approaches and protocols.

RESULTS: Analysis of all possible modes of Mendelian inheritance, focusing on both single nucleotide variants (SNV) and copy number variant (CNV) alleles, yielded a likely contributory variant in 36\% (27/74) of cases. If one includes candidate genes with variants identified within a single family, a potential contributory variant was identified in a total of ~51\% (38/74) of cases enrolled in this pilot study. The molecular diagnosis was achieved in 30/63 trios (47.6\%). Besides this, the analysis workflow yielded evidence for pathogenic variants in disease-associated genes in 4/6 singleton cases (66.6\%), 1/1 multiplex family involving three affected siblings, and 3/4 (75\%) quartet families. Both the analytical pipeline and the collaborative efforts between the diagnostic and research laboratories provided insights that allowed recent disease gene discoveries (PURA, TANGO2, EMC1, GNB5, ATAD3A, and MIPEP) and increased the number of novel genes, defined in this study as genes identified in more than one family (DHX30 and EBF3).

CONCLUSION: An efficient genomics pipeline in which clinical sequencing in a diagnostic laboratory is followed by the detailed reanalysis of unsolved cases in a research environment, supplemented with WES data from additional family members, and subject to adjuvant bioinformatics analyses including relaxed variant filtering parameters in informatics pipelines, can enhance the molecular diagnostic yield and provide mechanistic insights into Mendelian disorders. Implementing these approaches requires collaborative clinical molecular diagnostic and research efforts.

}, keywords = {Adenosine Triphosphatases, ATPases Associated with Diverse Cellular Activities, Computational Biology, DNA Copy Number Variations, DNA-Binding Proteins, Exome, Female, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Genomics, GTP-Binding Protein beta Subunits, Humans, Male, Membrane Proteins, Metalloendopeptidases, Mitochondrial Proteins, Pilot Projects, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Transcription Factors}, issn = {1756-994X}, doi = {10.1186/s13073-017-0412-6}, author = {Eldomery, Mohammad K and Coban-Akdemir, Zeynep and Harel, Tamar and Rosenfeld, Jill A and Gambin, Tomasz and Stray-Pedersen, Asbj{\o}rg and K{\"u}ry, S{\'e}bastien and Mercier, Sandra and Lessel, Davor and Denecke, Jonas and Wiszniewski, Wojciech and Penney, Samantha and Liu, Pengfei and Bi, Weimin and Lalani, Seema R and Schaaf, Christian P and Wangler, Michael F and Bacino, Carlos A and Lewis, Richard Alan and Potocki, Lorraine and Graham, Brett H and Belmont, John W and Scaglia, Fernando and Orange, Jordan S and Jhangiani, Shalini N and Chiang, Theodore and Doddapaneni, Harsha and Hu, Jianhong and Muzny, Donna M and Xia, Fan and Beaudet, Arthur L and Boerwinkle, Eric and Eng, Christine M and Plon, Sharon E and Sutton, V Reid and Gibbs, Richard A and Posey, Jennifer E and Yang, Yaping and Lupski, James R} } @article {339, title = {Resolution of Disease Phenotypes Resulting from Multilocus Genomic Variation.}, journal = {N Engl J Med}, volume = {376}, year = {2017}, month = {2017 01 05}, pages = {21-31}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Whole-exome sequencing can provide insight into the relationship between observed clinical phenotypes and underlying genotypes.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from a series of 7374 consecutive unrelated patients who had been referred to a clinical diagnostic laboratory for whole-exome sequencing; our goal was to determine the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients for whom more than one molecular diagnosis was reported. The phenotypic similarity between molecularly diagnosed pairs of diseases was calculated with the use of terms from the Human Phenotype Ontology.

RESULTS: A molecular diagnosis was rendered for 2076 of 7374 patients (28.2\%); among these patients, 101 (4.9\%) had diagnoses that involved two or more disease loci. We also analyzed parental samples, when available, and found that de novo variants accounted for 67.8\% (61 of 90) of pathogenic variants in autosomal dominant disease genes and 51.7\% (15 of 29) of pathogenic variants in X-linked disease genes; both variants were de novo in 44.7\% (17 of 38) of patients with two monoallelic variants. Causal copy-number variants were found in 12 patients (11.9\%) with multiple diagnoses. Phenotypic similarity scores were significantly lower among patients in whom the phenotype resulted from two distinct mendelian disorders that affected different organ systems (50 patients) than among patients with disorders that had overlapping phenotypic features (30 patients) (median score, 0.21 vs. 0.36; P=1.77{\texttimes}10).

CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we found multiple molecular diagnoses in 4.9\% of cases in which whole-exome sequencing was informative. Our results show that structured clinical ontologies can be used to determine the degree of overlap between two mendelian diseases in the same patient; the diseases can be distinct or overlapping. Distinct disease phenotypes affect different organ systems, whereas overlapping disease phenotypes are more likely to be caused by two genes encoding proteins that interact within the same pathway. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation.).

}, keywords = {Exome, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Genetic Variation, Genotyping Techniques, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, Humans, Phenotype, Retrospective Studies, Sequence Analysis, DNA}, issn = {1533-4406}, doi = {10.1056/NEJMoa1516767}, author = {Posey, Jennifer E and Harel, Tamar and Liu, Pengfei and Rosenfeld, Jill A and James, Regis A and Coban Akdemir, Zeynep H and Walkiewicz, Magdalena and Bi, Weimin and Xiao, Rui and Ding, Yan and Xia, Fan and Beaudet, Arthur L and Muzny, Donna M and Gibbs, Richard A and Boerwinkle, Eric and Eng, Christine M and Sutton, V Reid and Shaw, Chad A and Plon, Sharon E and Yang, Yaping and Lupski, James R} } @article {540, title = {Use of Exome Sequencing for Infants in Intensive Care Units: Ascertainment of Severe Single-Gene Disorders and Effect on Medical Management.}, journal = {JAMA Pediatr}, volume = {171}, year = {2017}, month = {2017 12 04}, pages = {e173438}, abstract = {

Importance: While congenital malformations and genetic diseases are a leading cause of early infant death, to our knowledge, the contribution of single-gene disorders in this group is undetermined.

Objective: To determine the diagnostic yield and use of clinical exome sequencing in critically ill infants.

Design, Setting, and Participants: Clinical exome sequencing was performed for 278 unrelated infants within the first 100 days of life who were admitted to Texas Children{\textquoteright}s Hospital in Houston, Texas, during a 5-year period between December 2011 and January 2017. Exome sequencing types included proband exome, trio exome, and critical trio exome, a rapid genomic assay for seriously ill infants.

Main Outcomes and Measures: Indications for testing, diagnostic yield of clinical exome sequencing, turnaround time, molecular findings, patient age at diagnosis, and effect on medical management among a group of critically ill infants who were suspected to have genetic disorders.

Results: The mean (SEM) age for infants participating in the study was 28.5 (1.7) days; of these, the mean (SEM) age was 29.0 (2.2) days for infants undergoing proband exome sequencing, 31.5 (3.9) days for trio exome, and 22.7 (3.9) days for critical trio exome. Clinical indications for exome sequencing included a range of medical concerns. Overall, a molecular diagnosis was achieved in 102 infants (36.7\%) by clinical exome sequencing, with relatively low yield for cardiovascular abnormalities. The diagnosis affected medical management for 53 infants (52.0\%) and had a substantial effect on informed redirection of care, initiation of new subspecialist care, medication/dietary modifications, and furthering life-saving procedures in select patients. Critical trio exome sequencing revealed a molecular diagnosis in 32 of 63 infants (50.8\%) at a mean (SEM) of 33.1 (5.6) days of life with a mean (SEM) turnaround time of 13.0 (0.4) days. Clinical care was altered by the diagnosis in 23 of 32 patients (71.9\%). The diagnostic yield, patient age at diagnosis, and medical effect in the group that underwent critical trio exome sequencing were significantly different compared with the group who underwent regular exome testing. For deceased infants (n = 81), genetic disorders were molecularly diagnosed in 39 (48.1\%) by exome sequencing, with implications for recurrence risk counseling.

Conclusions and Relevance: Exome sequencing is a powerful tool for the diagnostic evaluation of critically ill infants with suspected monogenic disorders in the neonatal and pediatric intensive care units and its use has a notable effect on clinical decision making.

}, keywords = {Adult, Critical Care, Disease Management, Exome, Genetic Counseling, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Humans, Infant, Infant Care, Infant, Newborn, Intensive Care Units, Pediatric, Length of Stay, Retrospective Studies, Texas, Whole Exome Sequencing}, issn = {2168-6211}, doi = {10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3438}, author = {Meng, Linyan and Pammi, Mohan and Saronwala, Anirudh and Magoulas, Pilar and Ghazi, Andrew Ray and Vetrini, Francesco and Zhang, Jing and He, Weimin and Dharmadhikari, Avinash V and Qu, Chunjing and Ward, Patricia and Braxton, Alicia and Narayanan, Swetha and Ge, Xiaoyan and Tokita, Mari J and Santiago-Sim, Teresa and Dai, Hongzheng and Chiang, Theodore and Smith, Hadley and Azamian, Mahshid S and Robak, Laurie and Bostwick, Bret L and Schaaf, Christian P and Potocki, Lorraine and Scaglia, Fernando and Bacino, Carlos A and Hanchard, Neil A and Wangler, Michael F and Scott, Daryl and Brown, Chester and Hu, Jianhong and Belmont, John W and Burrage, Lindsay C and Graham, Brett H and Sutton, Vernon Reid and Craigen, William J and Plon, Sharon E and Lupski, James R and Beaudet, Arthur L and Gibbs, Richard A and Muzny, Donna M and Miller, Marcus J and Wang, Xia and Leduc, Magalie S and Xiao, Rui and Liu, Pengfei and Shaw, Chad and Walkiewicz, Magdalena and Bi, Weimin and Xia, Fan and Lee, Brendan and Eng, Christine M and Yang, Yaping and Lalani, Seema R} } @article {229, title = {Parental somatic mosaicism is underrecognized and influences recurrence risk of genomic disorders.}, journal = {Am J Hum Genet}, volume = {95}, year = {2014}, month = {2014 Aug 07}, pages = {173-82}, abstract = {

New human mutations are thought to originate in germ cells, thus making a recurrence of the same mutation in a sibling exceedingly rare. However, increasing sensitivity of genomic technologies has anecdotally revealed mosaicism for mutations in somatic tissues of apparently healthy parents. Such somatically mosaic parents might also have germline mosaicism that can potentially cause unexpected intergenerational recurrences. Here, we show that somatic mosaicism for transmitted mutations among parents of children with simplex genetic disease is more common than currently appreciated. Using the sensitivity of individual-specific breakpoint PCR, we prospectively screened 100 families with children affected by genomic disorders due to rare deletion copy-number variants (CNVs) determined to be de novo by clinical analysis of parental DNA. Surprisingly, we identified four cases of low-level somatic mosaicism for the transmitted CNV in DNA isolated from parental blood. Integrated probabilistic modeling of gametogenesis developed in response to our observations predicts that mutations in parental blood increase recurrence risk substantially more than parental mutations confined to the germline. Moreover, despite the fact that maternally transmitted mutations are the minority of alleles, our model suggests that sexual dimorphisms in gametogenesis result in a greater proportion of somatically mosaic transmitting mothers who are thus at increased risk of recurrence. Therefore, somatic mosaicism together with sexual differences in gametogenesis might explain a considerable fraction of unexpected recurrences of X-linked recessive disease. Overall, our results underscore an important role for somatic mosaicism and mitotic replicative mutational mechanisms in transmission genetics.

}, keywords = {Cell Division, DNA Copy Number Variations, Female, Gametogenesis, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Genomics, Germ Cells, Germ-Line Mutation, Humans, Male, Models, Genetic, Mosaicism, Mutation, Pedigree, Prospective Studies, Recurrence, Risk, Sex Characteristics, Smith-Magenis Syndrome}, issn = {1537-6605}, doi = {10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.07.003}, author = {Campbell, Ian M and Yuan, Bo and Robberecht, Caroline and Pfundt, Rolph and Szafranski, Przemyslaw and McEntagart, Meriel E and Nagamani, Sandesh C S and Erez, Ayelet and Bartnik, Magdalena and Wi{\'s}niowiecka-Kowalnik, Barbara and Plunkett, Katie S and Pursley, Amber N and Kang, Sung-Hae L and Bi, Weimin and Lalani, Seema R and Bacino, Carlos A and Vast, Mala and Marks, Karen and Patton, Michael and Olofsson, Peter and Patel, Ankita and Veltman, Joris A and Cheung, Sau Wai and Shaw, Chad A and Vissers, Lisenka E L M and Vermeesch, Joris R and Lupski, James R and Stankiewicz, Pawe{\l}} } @article {301, title = {Deletions of recessive disease genes: CNV contribution to carrier states and disease-causing alleles.}, journal = {Genome Res}, volume = {23}, year = {2013}, month = {2013 Sep}, pages = {1383-94}, abstract = {

Over 1200 recessive disease genes have been described in humans. The prevalence, allelic architecture, and per-genome load of pathogenic alleles in these genes remain to be fully elucidated, as does the contribution of DNA copy-number variants (CNVs) to carrier status and recessive disease. We mined CNV data from 21,470 individuals obtained by array-comparative genomic hybridization in a clinical diagnostic setting to identify deletions encompassing or disrupting recessive disease genes. We identified 3212 heterozygous potential carrier deletions affecting 419 unique recessive disease genes. Deletion frequency of these genes ranged from one occurrence to 1.5\%. When compared with recessive disease genes never deleted in our cohort, the 419 recessive disease genes affected by at least one carrier deletion were longer and located farther from known dominant disease genes, suggesting that the formation and/or prevalence of carrier CNVs may be affected by both local and adjacent genomic features and by selection. Some subjects had multiple carrier CNVs (307 subjects) and/or carrier deletions encompassing more than one recessive disease gene (206 deletions). Heterozygous deletions spanning multiple recessive disease genes may confer carrier status for multiple single-gene disorders, for complex syndromes resulting from the combination of two or more recessive conditions, or may potentially cause clinical phenotypes due to a multiply heterozygous state. In addition to carrier mutations, we identified homozygous and hemizygous deletions potentially causative for recessive disease. We provide further evidence that CNVs contribute to the allelic architecture of both carrier and recessive disease-causing mutations. Thus, a complete recessive carrier screening method or diagnostic test should detect CNV alleles.

}, keywords = {Alleles, Comparative Genomic Hybridization, Databases, Genetic, DNA Copy Number Variations, Gene Deletion, Gene Frequency, Genes, Dominant, Genes, Recessive, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Homozygote, Humans}, issn = {1549-5469}, doi = {10.1101/gr.156075.113}, author = {Boone, Philip M and Campbell, Ian M and Baggett, Brett C and Soens, Zachry T and Rao, Mitchell M and Hixson, Patricia M and Patel, Ankita and Bi, Weimin and Cheung, Sau Wai and Lalani, Seema R and Beaudet, Arthur L and Stankiewicz, Pawel and Shaw, Chad A and Lupski, James R} }