Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Aug 3;110(8):1229-1248.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.06.009.

Beyond the exome: What's next in diagnostic testing for Mendelian conditions

Collaborators, Affiliations
Review

Beyond the exome: What's next in diagnostic testing for Mendelian conditions

Monica H Wojcik et al. Am J Hum Genet. .

Abstract

Despite advances in clinical genetic testing, including the introduction of exome sequencing (ES), more than 50% of individuals with a suspected Mendelian condition lack a precise molecular diagnosis. Clinical evaluation is increasingly undertaken by specialists outside of clinical genetics, often occurring in a tiered fashion and typically ending after ES. The current diagnostic rate reflects multiple factors, including technical limitations, incomplete understanding of variant pathogenicity, missing genotype-phenotype associations, complex gene-environment interactions, and reporting differences between clinical labs. Maintaining a clear understanding of the rapidly evolving landscape of diagnostic tests beyond ES, and their limitations, presents a challenge for non-genetics professionals. Newer tests, such as short-read genome or RNA sequencing, can be challenging to order, and emerging technologies, such as optical genome mapping and long-read DNA sequencing, are not available clinically. Furthermore, there is no clear guidance on the next best steps after inconclusive evaluation. Here, we review why a clinical genetic evaluation may be negative, discuss questions to be asked in this setting, and provide a framework for further investigation, including the advantages and disadvantages of new approaches that are nascent in the clinical sphere. We present a guide for the next best steps after inconclusive molecular testing based upon phenotype and prior evaluation, including when to consider referral to research consortia focused on elucidating the underlying cause of rare unsolved genetic disorders.

Keywords: PacBio sequencing; RNA sequencing; exome reanalysis; long-read sequencing; meatabolomics; nanopore sequencing; non-diagnostic exome; optical genome mapping.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests C.M.R. is a consultant for My Gene Counsel. H.B. is a shareholder of Bionano Genomics Inc, Pacific Biosciences Inc, and Illumina Inc. B.Y. has received royalties from UpToDate. A.O.-L. is on the SAB of Congenica. S.B.M. is a consultant for BioMarin, MyOme, and Tenaya Therapeutics. M.E.T. consults for BrigeBio Pharma and receives research funding and/or reagents from Illumina Inc., Levo Therapeutics, and Microsoft Inc. M.T.W. holds stock in Personalis, Inc. F.J.S. has received travel support to speak on behalf of ONT and PacBio. D.E.M. holds stock options in MyOme and is engaged in a research agreement with ONT, is on a scientific advisory board at ONT, and they have paid for him to travel to speak on their behalf.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Evaluation of individuals unsolved after ES Testing paths and options for individuals with clinical findings that cannot be partially or fully explained by a precise genetic diagnosis after exome sequencing are shown. In each path, exome reanalysis should be considered first. Many options are similar among the various paths but are of highest diagnostic yield at different steps of the evaluation process.

Update of

References

    1. Karczewski K.J., Francioli L.C., Tiao G., Cummings B.B., Alföldi J., Wang Q., Collins R.L., Laricchia K.M., Ganna A., Birnbaum D.P., et al. The mutational constraint spectrum quantified from variation in 141,456 humans. Nature. 2020;581:434–443. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Landrum M.J., Lee J.M., Benson M., Brown G.R., Chao C., Chitipiralla S., Gu B., Hart J., Hoffman D., Jang W., et al. ClinVar: improving access to variant interpretations and supporting evidence. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:D1062–D1067. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lander E.S., Linton L.M., Birren B., Nusbaum C., Zody M.C., Baldwin J., Devon K., Dewar K., Doyle M., FitzHugh W., et al. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 2001;409:860–921. - PubMed
    1. Venter J.C., Adams M.D., Myers E.W., Li P.W., Mural R.J., Sutton G.G., Smith H.O., Yandell M., Evans C.A., Holt R.A., et al. The sequence of the human genome. Science. 2001;291:1304–1351. - PubMed
    1. Oostlander A.E., Meijer G.A., Ylstra B. Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization and its applications in human genetics. Clin. Genet. 2004;66:488–495. - PubMed

Publication types