Explore the vast range of titles available.

Disclaimer: These recommendations are designed primarily as an educational resource for medical geneticists and other healthcare providers to help them provide quality medical services. Adherence to these recommendations is completely voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. These recommendations should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinician should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific clinical circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinicians are encouraged to document the reasons for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with this statement. Clinicians also are advised to take notice of the date this statement was adopted and to consider other medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date. It also would be prudent to consider whether intellectual property interests may restrict the performance of certain tests and other procedures. To promote standardized reporting of actionable information from clinical genomic sequencing, in 2013, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) published a minimum list of genes to be reported as incidental or secondary findings. The goal was to identify and manage risks for selected highly penetrant genetic disorders through established interventions aimed at preventing or significantly reducing morbidity and mortality. The ACMG subsequently established the Secondary Findings Maintenance Working Group to develop a process for curating and updating the list over time. We describe here the new process for accepting and evaluating nominations for updates to the secondary findings list. We also report outcomes from six nominations received in the initial 15 months after the process was implemented. Applying the new process while upholding the core principles of the original policy statement resulted in the addition of four genes and removal of one gene; one gene did not meet criteria for inclusion. The updated secondary findings minimum list includes 59 medically actionable genes recommended for return in clinical genomic sequencing. We discuss future areas of focus, encourage continued input from the medical community, and call for research on the impact of returning genomic secondary findings.

In clinical exome and genome sequencing, there is a potential for the recognition and reporting of incidental or secondary findings unrelated to the indication for ordering the sequencing but of medical value for patient care. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recently published a policy statement on clinical sequencing that emphasized the importance of alerting the patient to the possibility of such results in pretest patient discussions, clinical testing, and reporting of results. The ACMG appointed a Working Group on Incidental Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing to make recommendations about responsible management of incidental findings when patients undergo exome or genome sequencing. This Working Group conducted a year-long consensus process, including an open forum at the 2012 Annual Meeting and review by outside experts, and produced recommendations that have been approved by the ACMG Board. Specific and detailed recommendations, and the background and rationale for these recommendations, are described herein. The ACMG recommends that laboratories performing clinical sequencing seek and report mutations of the specified classes or types in the genes listed here. This evaluation and reporting should be performed for all clinical germline (constitutional) exome and genome sequencing, including the “normal” of tumor-normal subtractive analyses in all subjects, irrespective of age but excluding fetal samples. We recognize that there are insufficient data on penetrance and clinical utility to fully support these recommendations, and we encourage the creation of an ongoing process for updating these recommendations at least annually as further data are collected. Genet Med 2013:15(7):565–574

Ludwine Messiaen and colleagues report the identification of constitutional LZTR1 mutations in individuals with schwannomatosis, an autosomal dominant inherited disorder of multiple schwannomas. Constitutional SMARCB1 mutations at 22q11.23 have been found in ∼50% of familial and <10% of sporadic schwannomatosis cases 1 . We sequenced highly conserved regions along 22q from eight individuals with schwannomatosis whose schwannomas involved somatic loss of one copy of 22q, encompassing SMARCB1 and NF2 , with a different somatic mutation of the other NF2 allele in every schwannoma but no mutation of the remaining SMARCB1 allele in blood and tumor samples. LZTR1 germline mutations were identified in seven of the eight cases. LZTR1 sequencing in 12 further cases with the same molecular signature identified 9 additional germline mutations. Loss of heterozygosity with retention of an LZTR1 mutation was present in all 25 schwannomas studied. Mutations segregated with disease in all available affected first-degree relatives, although four asymptomatic parents also carried an LZTR1 mutation. Our findings identify LZTR1 as a gene predisposing to an autosomal dominant inherited disorder of multiple schwannomas in ∼80% of 22q-related schwannomatosis cases lacking mutation in SMARCB1 .

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant tumor predisposition syndrome that affects children and adults. Individuals with NF1 are at high risk for central nervous system neoplasms including gliomas. The purpose of this review is to discuss the spectrum of intracranial gliomas arising in individuals with NF1 with a focus on recent preclinical and clinical data. In this review, possible mechanisms of gliomagenesis are discussed, including the contribution of different signaling pathways and tumor microenvironment. Furthermore, we discuss the recent notable advances in the developing therapeutic landscape for NF1-associated gliomas including clinical trials and collaborative efforts.

Completion of the Human Genome Project, in conjunction with dramatic reductions in the cost of DNA sequencing and advances in translational research, is gradually ushering genomic discoveries and technologies into the practice of medicine. The rapid pace of these advances is opening up a gap between the knowledge available about the clinical relevance of genomic information and the ability of clinicians to include such information in their medical practices. This educational gap threatens to be rate limiting to the clinical adoption of genomics in medicine. Solutions will require not only a better understanding of the clinical implications of genetic discoveries but also training in genomics at all levels of professional development, including for individuals in formal training and others who long ago completed such training. The National Human Genome Research Institute has convened the Inter-Society Coordinating Committee for Physician Education in Genomics (ISCC) to develop and share best practices in the use of genomics in medicine. The ISCC has developed a framework for development of genomics practice competencies that may serve as a starting point for formulation of competencies for physicians in various medical disciplines. Genet Med 16 11, 804–809.

Background The uptake of exome/genome sequencing has introduced unexpected testing results (incidental findings) that have become a major challenge for both testing laboratories and providers. While the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics has outlined guidelines for laboratory management of clinically actionable secondary findings, debate remains as to whether incidental findings should be returned to patients, especially those representing pediatric populations. Methods The Sequencing Analysis and Diagnostic Yield working group in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium has collected a cohort of pediatric patients found to harbor a genomic sequencing-identified non-ACMG-recommended incidental finding. The incidental variants were not thought to be associated with the indication for testing and were disclosed to patients and families. Results In total, 23 \"non-ACMG-recommended incidental findings were identified in 21 pediatric patients included in the study. These findings span four different research studies/laboratories and demonstrate differences in incidental finding return rate across study sites. We summarize specific cases to highlight core considerations that surround identification and return of incidental findings (uncertainty of disease onset, disease severity, age of onset, clinical actionability, and personal utility), and suggest that interpretation of incidental findings in pediatric patients can be difficult given evolving phenotypes. Furthermore, return of incidental findings can benefit patients and providers, but do present challenges. Conclusions While there may be considerable benefit to return of incidental genetic findings, these findings can be burdensome to providers and present risk to patients. It is important that laboratories conducting genomic testing establish internal guidelines in anticipation of detection. Moreover, cross-laboratory guidelines may aid in reducing the potential for policy heterogeneity across laboratories as it relates to incidental finding detection and return. However, future discussion is required to determine whether cohesive guidelines or policy statements are warranted.

The 2010 consensus statement on diagnostic chromosomal microarray (CMA) testing recommended an array resolution ≥400 kb throughout the genome as a balance of analytical and clinical sensitivity. In spite of the clear evidence for pathogenicity of large copy-number variants (CNVs) in neurodevelopmental disorders and/or congenital anomalies, the significance of small, nonrecurrent CNVs (<500 kb) has not been well established in a clinical setting. We investigated the clinical significance of all nonpolymorphic small, nonrecurrent CNVs (<500 kb) in patients referred for CMA clinical testing over a period of 6 years, from 2009 to 2014 (a total of 4,417 patients). We excluded from our study patients with benign or likely benign CNVs and patients with only recurrent microdeletions/microduplications <500 kb. In total, 383 patients (8.67%) were found to carry at least one small, nonrecurrent CNV, of whom 176 patients (3.98%) had one small CNV classified as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), 45 (1.02%) had two or more small VUS CNVs, 20 (0.45%) had one small VUS CNV and a recurrent CNV, 113 (2.56%) had one small pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNV, 17 (0.38%) had two or more small pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNVs, and 12 (0.27%) had one small pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNV and a recurrent CNV. Within the pathogenic group, 80 of 142 patients (56% of all small pathogenic CNV cases) were found to have a single whole-gene or exonic deletion. The themes that emerged from our study are presented in the Discussion section. Our study demonstrates the diagnostic clinical relevance of small, nonrecurrent CNVs <500 kb during CMA clinical testing and underscores the need for careful clinical interpretation of these CNVs. Genet Med19 4, 377–385.

This practice resource is designed primarily as an educational resource for medical geneticists and other clinicians to help them provide quality medical services. Adherence to this practice resource is completely voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. This practice resource should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinician should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific clinical circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinicians are encouraged to document the reasons for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with this practice resource. Clinicians also are advised to take notice of the date this practice resource was adopted, and to consider other medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date. It also would be prudent to consider whether intellectual property interests may restrict the performance of certain tests and other procedures. Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant disorder that is caused by a heterozygous loss-of-function variant in the tumor suppressor gene NF1; it affects ~1/1,900–1/3,500 people worldwide. The disorder is associated with an 8–15-year reduction in average life expectancy in both men and women, primarily due to malignant neoplasms and cardiovascular causes. A work group of experts sought to determine the prevalence, morbidity and mortality, and available treatments of common and emerging NF1-related clinical problems in adults. Work-group members identified peer-reviewed publications from PubMed. Publications derived from populations and multi-institution cohorts were prioritized. Recommendations for management arose by consensus from this literature and the collective expertise of the authors. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), breast cancer, cutaneous neurofibromas, and significant psychiatric and neurologic diagnoses are common problems in patients with NF1. Patient education and sensitization to worrisome signs and symptoms such as progressive severe pain (MPNST), changes in tumor volume (MPNST), new, unexplained neurologic symptoms (MPNST, brain tumors), and diaphoresis/palpitations (pheochromocytoma) are important. Although many issues in adults with NF1 can be managed by an internist or family physician, we strongly encourage evaluation by, and care coordination with, a specialized NF1 clinic.

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a common genetic disorder characterized by the occurrence of nerve sheath tumors and considerable clinical heterogeneity. Some translational studies have been limited by the lack of animal models available for assessing patient-specific mutations. In order to test therapeutic approaches that might restore function to the mutated gene or gene product, we developed mice harboring NF1 patient-specific mutations including a nonsense mutation (c.2041C>T; p.Arg681*) and a missense mutation (c.2542G>C; p.Gly848Arg). The latter is associated with the development of multiple plexiform neurofibromas along spinal nerve roots. We demonstrate that the human nonsense NF1(Arg681*) and missense NF1(Gly848Arg) mutations have different effects on neurofibromin expression in the mouse and each recapitulates unique aspects of the NF1 phenotype, depending upon the genetic context when assessed in the homozygous state or when paired with a conditional knockout allele. Whereas the missense Nf1(Gly848Arg) mutation fails to produce an overt phenotype in the mouse, animals homozygous for the nonsense Nf1(Arg681*) mutation are not viable. Mice with one Nf1(Arg681*) allele in combination with a conditional floxed Nf1 allele and the DhhCre transgene (Nf1(4F/Arg681*); DhhCre) display disorganized nonmyelinating axons and neurofibromas along the spinal column, which leads to compression of the spinal cord and paralysis. This model will be valuable for preclinical testing of novel nonsense suppression therapies using drugs to target in-frame point mutations that create premature termination codons in individuals with NF1.

Neurofibromatosis type 1 is a complex autosomal dominant disorder caused by germline mutations in the NF1 tumour suppressor gene. Nearly all individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 develop pigmentary lesions (café-au-lait macules, skinfold freckling and Lisch nodules) and dermal neurofibromas. Some individuals develop skeletal abnormalities (scoliosis, tibial pseudarthrosis and orbital dysplasia), brain tumours (optic pathway gliomas and glioblastoma), peripheral nerve tumours (spinal neurofibromas, plexiform neurofibromas and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours), learning disabilities, attention deficits, and social and behavioural problems, which can negatively affect quality of life. With the identification of NF1 and the generation of accurate preclinical mouse strains that model some of these clinical features, therapies that target the underlying molecular and cellular pathophysiology for neurofibromatosis type 1 are becoming available. Although no single treatment exists, current clinical management strategies include early detection of disease phenotypes (risk assessment) and biologically targeted therapies. Similarly, new medical and behavioural interventions are emerging to improve the quality of life of patients. Although considerable progress has been made in understanding this condition, numerous challenges remain; a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach is required to manage individuals with neurofibromatosis type1 and to develop effective treatments. Neurofibromatosis type 1 is caused by mutations in the NF1 tumour suppressor gene. This Primer by Gutmann and colleagues discusses the genetics underlying the development of this disease, and describes the diagnosis and treatment of the widespread clinical manifestations.