Explore the vast range of titles available.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) in people before the age of 35 years is a devastating event for any family. The causes of SCD in the young can be broadly divided into two groups: heritable cardiac disorders that affect the heart structure (cardiomyopathies) and primary electrical disorders (cardiac ion channelopathies). Genetic testing is vital as those suffering from cardiac ion channelopathies have structurally normal hearts, and those with cardiomyopathies may only show subtle abnormalities in the heart and these signs may not be detected during an autopsy. Post-mortem genetic testing of SCD victims is important to identify the underlying genetic cause. This is important as family cascade screening may be undertaken to identify those who may be at risk and provide vital information about risk stratification and clinical management. The development of massively parallel sequencing (MPS) has made it possible for the simultaneous screening of multiple patients for hundreds of genes. In light of this, we opted to develop an MPS approach for SCD analysis that would allow us to screen for mutations in genes implicated in cardiomyopathies and cardiac ion channelopathies. The rationale behind this panel was to limit it to genes carrying the greatest mutation load. If no likely pathogenic gene variant were found then testing could cascade to whole exome/genome sequencing as a gene-discovery exercise. The overarching aim was to design and validate a custom-cardiac panel that satisfies the diagnostic requirements of LabPLUS (Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, NZ) and the guidelines provided by the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia and the Association for Clinical Genetic Science.

Gene sequencing panels are a powerful diagnostic tool for many clinical presentations associated with genetic disorders. Advances in DNA sequencing technology have made gene panels more economical, flexible, and efficient. Because the genes included on gene panels vary widely between laboratories in gene content (e.g., number, reason for inclusion, evidence level for gene–disease association) and technical completeness (e.g., depth of coverage), standards that address technical and clinical aspects of gene panels are needed. This document serves as a technical standard for laboratories designing, offering, and reporting gene panel testing. Although these principles can apply to multiple indications for genetic testing, the primary focus is on diagnostic gene panels (as opposed to carrier screening or predictive testing) with emphasis on technical considerations for the specific genes being tested. This technical standard specifically addresses the impact of gene panel content on clinical sensitivity, specificity, and validity—in the context of gene evidence for contribution to and strength of evidence for gene–disease association—as well as technical considerations such as sequencing limitations, presence of pseudogenes/gene families, mosaicism, transcript choice, detection of copy-number variants, reporting, and disclosure of assay limitations.

Hereditary neuromuscular disorders (NMDs) are clinically and genetically heterogeneous, with variable severity and onset from birth to adulthood. This study retrospectively analyzes genetic findings in 2009 Iranian individuals with suspected NMDs over 11 years to highlight gene involvement and mutational patterns. Patients underwent gene panel sequencing (GPS), whole exome sequencing (WES), or MLPA for PMP22 in cases with suspected Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1 A (CMT1A). The diagnostic yield of GPS/WES was 46%. Dystrophies were the most prevalent, followed by neuropathies and myopathies. The key implicated genes were CAPN3 and DMD for dystrophies; GDAP1 and MME for neuropathies; GNE and ETFDH for myopathies. The most common phenotype group was dystrophies among both individuals with childhood-onset and adulthood-onset, but the most frequent mutated gene was CAPN3 in children and DYSF in adults. Identified variants include 761 (97%) single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and 24 (3%) copy number variations (CNVs). Notably, 26% of SNVs were novel. Among individuals tested with MLPA, 28% had confirmed PMP22 gene deletions or duplications, with 73% being duplications linked to CMT1A. This large-scale analysis provides insight into the genetic landscape of NMDs in Iran. Understanding gene distribution and mutation types can improve diagnosis and inform management strategies for affected individuals.

Considering the increasing number of identified driver oncogene alterations, additional genetic tests are required to determine the treatment for advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Next‐generation sequencing can detect multiple driver oncogenes simultaneously, enabling the analysis of limited amounts of biopsied tissue samples. In this retrospective, multicenter study (UMIN ID000039523), we evaluated real‐world clinical data using the Oncomine Dx Target Test Multi‐CDx System (Oncomine DxTT) as a companion diagnostic system. Patients with NSCLC who were tested for a panel of 46 genes using the Oncomine DxTT between June 2019 and January 2020 were eligible for enrollment. Patients from 19 institutions affiliated to the West Japan Oncology Group were recruited. The primary endpoint of the study was the success rate of genetic alteration testing in four driver genes (EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF) using the Oncomine DxTT. In total, 533 patients were enrolled in the study. The success rate of genetic alteration testing for all four genes was 80.1% (95% CI 76.5%‐83.4%). Surgical resection was associated with the highest success rate (88.0%), which was significantly higher than that for bronchoscopic biopsy (76.8%, P = .005). Multivariate analysis revealed a significant difference for surgical resection alone (P = .006, 95% CI 1.36‐6.18, odds ratio 2.90). Although the success rate of genetic alteration testing immediately after Oncomine DxTT induction was not sufficient in this study, optimizing specimen quantity and quality may improve the use of driver gene testing in clinical settings. The mutation identification success rate for all four genes was 80.1%. Surgical resection was associated with the highest success rate. Multivariate analysis showed a significant difference for surgical resection alone.

Predominantly antibody deficiencies (PAD) are a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by dysfunctional antibody production, low immunoglobulin levels in serum and impaired vaccine responses. The clinical picture is variable, ranging from mild symptoms to severe complications, which may include autoimmunity, gastrointestinal disease, allergy, and malignancies. If left untreated, PAD patients are at risk of enduring disease progression, irreversible organ damage, and reduced life expectancy. A timely diagnosis has been shown to significantly improve disease prognosis. Here, we report on our experience using targeted gene panel sequencing by employing Agilent’s HaloPlex or SureSelect and Illumina’s MiSeq technologies in a cohort of 291 individuals who presented with low or absent immunoglobulin levels in combination with or without other clinical features. In total, we have detected over 57 novel or previously reported relevant mutations in ADA, ADA2, BTK, CTLA4, LRBA, NFKB1, NFKB2, PIK3CD, STAT3 , and TNFRSF13B . Overall, a genetic diagnosis could be made in 24.7% of the investigated patients. The percentage of coverage for the targeted regions ranged from 90% to 98% in this study. Moreover, functional assays were performed on a defined group of the patients carrying candidate variants in CTLA4 , LRBA , NFKB1 and BTK , which confirmed their deleterious effect on protein expression and/or function. This study reiterates that the immunological heterogeneity of predominantly antibody deficiencies may have a diverse genetic origin, although certain clinical features may hint towards a specific group of defects. Employing targeted sequencing panels proves to be a very time- and cost-efficient, yet reliable, method for the establishment of a genetic diagnosis in individuals with PAD. However, in case of negative panel results, or if functional testing reveals inconspicuous observations in patients with a clear indication for genetic testing, further work-up including whole exome or whole genome sequencing should be considered.

Several distinct melanoma syndromes have been defined, and genetic tests are available for the associated causative genes. Guidelines for melanoma genetic testing have been published as an informal “rule of twos and threes,” but these guidelines apply to CDKN2A testing and are not intended for the more recently described non- CDKN2A melanoma syndromes. In order to develop an approach for the full spectrum of hereditary melanoma patients, we have separated melanoma syndromes into two types: “melanoma dominant” and “melanoma subordinate.” Syndromes in which melanoma is a predominant cancer type are considered melanoma dominant, although other cancers, such as mesothelioma or pancreatic cancers, may also be observed. These syndromes are associated with defects in CDKN2A , CDK4 , BAP1 , MITF , and POT1 . Melanoma-subordinate syndromes have an increased but lower risk of melanoma than that of other cancer(s) seen in the syndrome, such as breast and ovarian cancer or Cowden syndrome. Many of these melanoma-subordinate syndromes are associated with well-established predisposition genes (e.g., BRCA1/2 , PTEN ). It is likely that these predisposition genes are responsible for the increased susceptibility to melanoma as well but with lower penetrance than that observed for the dominant cancer(s) in those syndromes. In this review, we describe our extension of the “rule of twos and threes” for melanoma genetic testing. This algorithm incorporates an understanding of the spectrum of cancers and genes seen in association with melanoma to create a more comprehensive and tailored approach to genetic testing.

Integration of gene panels in the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) requires a careful evaluation of the risk associated with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs) detected in each gene. Here we analyzed 34 genes in 5131 suspected HBOC index cases by next-generation sequencing. Using the Exome Aggregation Consortium data sets plus 571 individuals from the French Exome Project, we simulated the probability that an individual from the Exome Aggregation Consortium carries a PV and compared it to the estimated frequency within the HBOC population. Odds ratio conferred by PVs within BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, ATM, BRIP1, CHEK2, and MSH6 were estimated at 13.22 [10.01–17.22], 8.61 [6.78–10.82], 8.22 [4.91–13.05], 4.54 [2.55–7.48], 5.23 [1.46–13.17], 3.20 [2.14–4.53], 2.49 [1.42–3.97], 1.67 [1.18–2.27], and 2.50 [1.12–4.67], respectively. PVs within RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 were associated with ovarian cancer family history (OR = 11.36 [5.78–19.59], 12.44 [2.94–33.30] and 3.82 [1.66–7.11]). PALB2 PVs were associated with bilateral breast cancer (OR = 16.17 [5.48–34.10]) and BARD1 PVs with triple-negative breast cancer (OR = 11.27 [3.37–25.01]). Burden tests performed in both patients and the French Exome Project population confirmed the association of PVs of BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51C with HBOC. Our results validate the integration of PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D in the diagnosis of HBOC and suggest that the other genes are involved in an oligogenic determinism.

Aims/hypothesis Monogenic forms of diabetes (MODY, neonatal diabetes mellitus and syndromic forms) are rare, and affected individuals may be misclassified and treated suboptimally. The prevalence of type 1 diabetes is high in Finnish children but systematic screening for monogenic diabetes has not been conducted. We assessed the prevalence and clinical manifestations of monogenic diabetes in children initially registered with type 1 diabetes in the Finnish Pediatric Diabetes Register (FPDR) but who had no type 1 diabetes-related autoantibodies (AABs) or had only low-titre islet cell autoantibodies (ICAs) at diagnosis. Methods The FPDR, covering approximately 90% of newly diagnosed diabetic individuals aged ≤15 years in Finland starting from 2002, includes data on diabetes-associated HLA genotypes and AAB data (ICA, and autoantibodies against insulin, GAD, islet antigen 2 and zinc transporter 8) at diagnosis. A next generation sequencing gene panel including 42 genes was used to identify monogenic diabetes. We interpreted the variants in HNF1A by using the gene-specific standardised criteria and reported pathogenic and likely pathogenic findings only. For other genes, we also reported variants of unknown significance if an individual’s phenotype suggested monogenic diabetes. Results Out of 6482 participants, we sequenced DNA for 152 (2.3%) testing negative for all AABs and 49 (0.8%) positive only for low-titre ICAs (ICA low ). A monogenic form of diabetes was revealed in 19 (12.5%) of the AAB-negative patients (14 [9.2%] had pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants) and two (4.1%) of the ICA low group. None had ketoacidosis at diagnosis or carried HLA genotypes conferring high risk for type 1 diabetes. The affected genes were GCK , HNF1A , HNF4A , HNF1B , INS , KCNJ11 , RFX6 , LMNA and WFS1 . A switch from insulin to oral medication was successful in four of five patients with variants in HNF1A , HNF4A or KCNJ11. Conclusions/interpretation More than 10% of AAB-negative children with newly diagnosed diabetes had a genetic finding associated with monogenic diabetes. Because the genetic diagnosis can lead to major changes in treatment, we recommend referring all AAB-negative paediatric patients with diabetes for genetic testing. Low-titre ICAs in the absence of other AABs does not always indicate a diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Graphical abstract

The contribution of recently established or candidate susceptibility genes to melanoma missing heritability has yet to be determined. Multigene panel testing could increase diagnostic yield and better define the role of candidate genes. We characterized 273 CDKN2A/ARF and CDK4-negative probands through a custom-designed targeted gene panel that included CDKN2A/ARF, CDK4, ACD, BAP1, MITF, POT1, TERF2IP, ATM, and PALB2. Co-segregation, loss of heterozygosity (LOH)/protein expression analysis, and splicing characterization were performed to improve variant classification. We identified 16 (5.9%) pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants in established high/medium penetrance cutaneous melanoma susceptibility genes (BAP1, POT1, ACD, MITF, and TERF2IP), including two novel variants in BAP1 and 4 in POT1. We also found four deleterious and five likely deleterious variants in ATM (3.3%). Thus, including potentially deleterious variants in ATM increased the diagnostic yield to about 9%. Inclusion of rare variants of uncertain significance would increase the overall detection yield to 14%. At least 10% of melanoma missing heritability may be explained through panel testing in our population. To our knowledge, this is the highest frequency of putative ATM deleterious variants reported in melanoma families, suggesting a possible role in melanoma susceptibility, which needs further investigation.

Background Panel gene sequencing is an established diagnostic tool for precision oncology of solid tumors, but its utility for the treatment of cancers of the digestive system in clinical routine is less well documented. Methods We retrospectively identified patients with advanced or metastatic gastrointestinal, pancreaticobiliary or hepatic cancers who received panel gene sequencing at a tertiary university hospital from 2015 to 2022. For these cases, we determined the spectrum of genetic alterations, clinicopathological parameters and treatment courses. Assessment of actionability of genetic alterations was based on the OncoKB database, cancer-specific ESMO treatment guidelines, and recommendations of the local molecular tumor board. Results In total, 155 patients received panel gene sequencing using either the Oncomine Focus (62 cases), Comprehensive (91 cases) or Childhood Cancer Research Assay (2 cases). The mean age of patients was 61 years (range 24–90) and 37% were female. Most patients suffered from either colorectal cancer (53%) or cholangiocellular carcinoma (19%). 327 genetic alterations were discovered in 123 tumor samples, with an average number of 2.1 alterations per tumor. The most frequently altered genes were TP53, KRAS and PIK3CA . Actionable gene alterations were detected in 13.5–56.8% of tumors, according to ESMO guidelines or the OncoKB database, respectively. Thirteen patients were treated with targeted therapies based on identified molecular alterations, with a median progression-free survival of 8.8 months. Conclusions Actionable genetic alterations are frequently detected by panel gene sequencing in patients with advanced cancers of the digestive tract, providing clinical benefit in selected cases. However, for the majority of identified actionable alterations, sufficient clinical evidence for targeted treatments is still lacking.