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
Multicenter Study
. 2025 Jan 14;104(1):e210106.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000210106. Epub 2024 Dec 19.

Exome and Genome Sequencing to Diagnose the Genetic Basis of Neonatal Hypotonia: An International Consortium Study

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Exome and Genome Sequencing to Diagnose the Genetic Basis of Neonatal Hypotonia: An International Consortium Study

Sarah U Morton et al. Neurology. .

Abstract

Background and objectives: Hypotonia is a relatively common finding among infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Consideration of genetic testing is recommended early in the care of infants with unexplained hypotonia. We aimed to assess the diagnostic yield and overall impact of exome and genome sequencing (ES and GS).

Methods: Consecutive infants with hypotonia were identified from research and clinical databases across 5 teaching hospitals in United States, Canada, United Kingdom, and Australia. Inclusion criteria included NICU admission and genetic evaluation. Infants with a known explanation for hypotonia were excluded. Data regarding infant characteristics, genetic testing, and diagnoses were collected. The primary outcome was identification of a molecular diagnosis. Impact on care was a secondary outcome. The Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results: We identified 147 infants with unexplained hypotonia. The median gestational age was 39 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 36-42 weeks), 77 (52%) were female, and the median age was 8 days at the time of evaluation (IQR 2-19 days). Eighty (54%) had hypotonia as the main clinical feature while 67 (46%) had additional multisystem involvement. Seventy-five (51%) underwent rapid ES, 44 (30%) rapid GS, 2 (1%) both ES and GS, and 26 (18%) were admitted before ES or GS became available. Of the 121 infants who underwent ES and/or GS, 72 (60%) had the primary outcome of a molecular diagnosis. In addition, 2 infants with mitochondrial genome variants were diagnosed by mitochondrial GS after negative ES, and one infant needed targeted testing to identify a short tandem repeat expansion missed by GS. The proportion diagnosed by ES and GS was not different between infants with hypotonia as the primary finding (37/56, 66%) and infants with multisystemic symptoms (35/65, 54%, odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 0.8-3.7, p value = 0.20). Testing was more likely to have an impact on care for infants receiving a genetic diagnosis (57/66 vs 14/33, OR 8.4, CI 2.9-26.1, p = 1.0E-05).

Discussion: Rapid ES and GS provided a molecular diagnosis for most of the infants with unexplained hypotonia who underwent testing. Further studies are needed to assess the generalizability of these findings as increased access to genetic testing becomes available.

Classification of evidence: This study provides Class IV evidence that in unexplained neonatal hypotonia, rapid ES or GS adds diagnostic specificity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no relevant disclosures. Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures.

Figures

Figure
Figure. Molecular Diagnoses Among Infants With Unexplained Hypotonia
Genes with pathogenic variants identified by ES/GS among patients with hypotonia. The inner ring represents the entire cohort of infants with unexplained hypotonia who had ES/GS and received a molecular diagnosis. The middle ring represents the proportion of infants with hypotonia as the primary finding or with multisystemic signs and symptoms. The outer ring represents specific molecular diagnoses in the cohort corresponding to the middle ring. ES = exome sequencing; GS = genome sequencing.

References

    1. Stark Z, Ellard S. Rapid genomic testing for critically ill children: time to become standard of care? Eur J Hum Genet. 2022;30(2):142-149. doi: 10.1038/s41431-021-00990-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Costain G, Walker S, Marano M, et al. Genome sequencing as a diagnostic test in children with unexplained medical complexity. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(9):e2018109. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.18109 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Trost B, Thiruvahindrapuram B, Chan AJS, et al. Genomic architecture of autism from comprehensive whole-genome sequence annotation. Cell. 2022;185(23):4409-4427.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.10.009 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marshall CR, Chowdhury S, Taft RJ, et al. Best practices for the analytical validation of clinical whole-genome sequencing intended for the diagnosis of germline disease. NPJ Genomic Med. 2020;5:47. doi: 10.1038/s41525-020-00154-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meng L, Pammi M, Saronwala A, et al. Use of exome sequencing for infants in intensive care units ascertainment of severe single-gene disorders and effect on medical management. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(12):1734388-e173510. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3438 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types