Journal Article

Multiple molecular diagnoses in the field of intellectual disability and congenital anomalies: 3.5% of all positive cases

Colin, Estelle, Molin, Arnaud, Grelet, Maude, Doray, Bérénice, Sorlin, Arthur, Putoux, Audrey, Jacquemont, Marie-Line, Garde, Aurore, Bertrand, Thierry Lavabre, Busa, Tiffany, Pujol, Pascal, Blanchet, Patricia, Masurel, Alice, Funalot, Benoit, Bansept, Claire, Nambot, Sophie, Moutton, Sébastien, Patat, Olivier, Layet, Valérie, Feillet, François, Vitobello, Antonio, Philip, Nicole, Geneviève, David, Safraou, Hana, Wells, Constance, Capri, Yline, Bonnet-Dupeyron, Marie Noëlle, Tessier, Aude, Julia, Sophie, Prieur, Fabienne, Lespinasse, James, Amram, Daniel, Jean-Marçais, Nolwenn, Couturier, Victor, Guiliano, Fabienne, Sigaudy, Sabine, Chevarin, Martin, Riccardi, Florence, Dubucs, Charlotte, Lacombe, Didier, Delanne, Julian, Parent, Philippe, Renaud, Mathilde, Coupier, Isabelle, Bellanger, Séverine Audebert, Alessandri, Jean-Luc, Vabres, Pierre, Lambert, Laetitia, Vincent, Aline, Petit, Florence, Trujillo, Yaumara Perdomo, Bruel, Ange-Line, Benigni, Charlotte, Goizet, Cyril, Gilbert-Dussardier, Brigitte, Perrin, Laurence, Caumes, Roseline, Laffargue, Fanny, Martin-Coignard, Dominique, Ruaud, Lyse, Boute, O

2024

Overview

PurposeWide access to clinical exome/genome sequencing (ES/GS) enables the identification of multiple molecular diagnoses (MMDs), being a long-standing but underestimated concept, defined by two or more causal loci implicated in the phenotype of an individual with a rare disease. Only few series report MMDs rates (1.8% to 7.1%). This study highlights the increasing role of MMDs in a large cohort of individuals addressed for congenital anomalies/intellectual disability (CA/ID).MethodsFrom 2014 to 2021, our diagnostic laboratory rendered 880/2658 positive ES diagnoses for CA/ID aetiology. Exhaustive search on MMDs from ES data was performed prospectively (January 2019 to December 2021) and retrospectively (March 2014 to December 2018).ResultsMMDs were identified in 31/880 individuals (3.5%), responsible for distinct (9/31) or overlapping (22/31) phenotypes, and potential MMDs in 39/880 additional individuals (4.4%).ConclusionMMDs are frequent in CA/ID and remain a strong challenge. Reanalysis of positive ES data appears essential when phenotypes are partially explained by the initial diagnosis or atypically enriched overtime. Up-to-date clinical data, clinical expertise from the referring physician, strong interactions between clinicians and biologists, and increasing gene discoveries and improved ES bioinformatics tools appear all the more fundamental to enhance chances of identifying MMDs. It is essential to provide appropriate patient care and genetic counselling.

• Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
• Subject: Bioinformatics / Congenital defects / Congenital diseases / Counseling / Diagnostics / Exome Sequencing / Genes / Genetic counseling / Genetic Variation / Genetics / Genomes / Genotype & phenotype / Human genetics / Humans / Intellectual disabilities / Intellectual Disability - diagnosis / Intellectual Disability - genetics / Life Sciences / Phenotype / Phenotypes / Rare diseases / Rare Diseases - genetics / Retrospective Studies / Whole genome sequencing