Title |
The clinical utility of rapid exome sequencing in a consanguineous population
|
---|---|
Published in |
Genome Medicine, June 2023
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13073-023-01192-5 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Dorota Monies, Ewa Goljan, Mirna Assoum, Muna Albreacan, Faisal Binhumaid, Shazia Subhani, Abdulmlik Boureggah, Mais Hashem, Firdous Abdulwahab, Omar Abuyousef, Mohamad H. Temsah, Fahad Alsohime, James Kelaher, Mohamed Abouelhoda, Brian F. Meyer, Fowzan S. Alkuraya |
Abstract |
The clinical utility of exome sequencing is now well documented. Rapid exome sequencing (RES) is more resource-intensive than regular exome sequencing and is typically employed in specialized clinical settings wherein urgent molecular diagnosis is thought to influence acute management. Studies on the clinical utility of RES have been largely limited to outbred populations. Here, we describe our experience with rapid exome sequencing (RES) in a highly consanguineous population. Clinical settings included intensive care units, prenatal cases approaching the legal cutoff for termination, and urgent transplant decisions. A positive molecular finding (a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant that explains the phenotype) was observed in 80 of 189 cases (42%), while 15 (8%) and 94 (50%) received ambiguous (variant of uncertain significance (VUS)) and negative results, respectively. The consanguineous nature of the study population gave us an opportunity to observe highly unusual and severe phenotypic expressions of previously reported genes. Clinical utility was observed in nearly all (79/80) cases with positive molecular findings and included management decisions, prognostication, and reproductive counseling. Reproductive counseling is a particularly important utility in this population where the overwhelming majority (86%) of identified variants are autosomal recessive, which are more actionable in this regard than the de novo variants typically reported by RES elsewhere. Indeed, our cost-effectiveness analysis shows compelling cost savings in the study population. This work expands the diversity of environments in which RES has a demonstrable clinical utility. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Saudi Arabia | 6 | 24% |
United Kingdom | 5 | 20% |
United States | 1 | 4% |
Estonia | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 12 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 15 | 60% |
Scientists | 9 | 36% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 2 | 22% |
Other | 2 | 22% |
Researcher | 1 | 11% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 11% |
Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 22% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 22% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 11% |
Computer Science | 1 | 11% |
Unknown | 3 | 33% |