1. Copy-number variants in clinical genome sequencing: deployment and interpretation for rare and undiagnosed disease
- Author
-
Alison J. Coffey, Alka Malhotra, Bryan R. Lajoie, Egor Dolzhenko, Denise L. Perry, Alicia Scocchia, R. Tanner Hagelstrom, Amirah Khouzam, Ryan J. Taft, Vani Rajan, Tina Hambuch, Stephen Tanner, Natasa Dzidic, Shimul Chowdhury, Andrew M. Gross, Trilochan Sahoo, Eric Roller, Subramanian S. Ajay, Erin Thorpe, Nicole J. Burns, Karine Hovanes, Sergii Ivakhno, David R. Bentley, Julia McEachern, Michael A. Eberle, Carolyn Brown, John W Belmont, Aditi Chawla, and Krista Bluske
- Subjects
Male ,0301 basic medicine ,Adolescent ,DNA Copy Number Variations ,Microarray ,whole genome sequencing (WGS) ,Computational biology ,Disease ,030105 genetics & heredity ,Biology ,Undiagnosed Diseases ,Article ,DNA sequencing ,Cohort Studies ,Young Adult ,03 medical and health sciences ,Rare Diseases ,medicine ,Humans ,Genetic Testing ,Copy-number variation ,Child ,Genetics (clinical) ,Whole Genome Sequencing ,Genome, Human ,Breakpoint ,Chromosome Mapping ,Infant ,Genomics ,medicine.disease ,Uniparental disomy ,rare and undiagnosed disease ,copy number variation (CNV) ,030104 developmental biology ,Child, Preschool ,structural variation (SV) ,Female ,DNA microarray ,Trisomy ,microarray - Abstract
Purpose Current diagnostic testing for genetic disorders involves serial use of specialized assays spanning multiple technologies. In principle, genome sequencing (GS) can detect all genomic pathogenic variant types on a single platform. Here we evaluate copy-number variant (CNV) calling as part of a clinically accredited GS test. Methods We performed analytical validation of CNV calling on 17 reference samples, compared the sensitivity of GS-based variants with those from a clinical microarray, and set a bound on precision using orthogonal technologies. We developed a protocol for family-based analysis of GS-based CNV calls, and deployed this across a clinical cohort of 79 rare and undiagnosed cases. Results We found that CNV calls from GS are at least as sensitive as those from microarrays, while only creating a modest increase in the number of variants interpreted (~10 CNVs per case). We identified clinically significant CNVs in 15% of the first 79 cases analyzed, all of which were confirmed by an orthogonal approach. The pipeline also enabled discovery of a uniparental disomy (UPD) and a 50% mosaic trisomy 14. Directed analysis of select CNVs enabled breakpoint level resolution of genomic rearrangements and phasing of de novo CNVs. Conclusion Robust identification of CNVs by GS is possible within a clinical testing environment.
- Published
- 2019