Reassessment of Mendelian gene pathogenicity using 7,855 cardiomyopathy cases and 60,706 reference samples

Roddy Walsh(Royal Brompton Hospital), Kate Thomson(Churchill Hospital), James S. Ware(Royal Brompton Hospital), Birgit Funke(Harvard University), Jessica Woodley(Churchill Hospital), Karen McGuire(Churchill Hospital), Francesco Mazzarotto(Royal Brompton Hospital), Edward Blair(Churchill Hospital), A Seller(Churchill Hospital), Jenny C. Taylor(Centre for Human Genetics), Eric Vallabh Minikel(Broad Institute), Daniel G. MacArthur(Broad Institute), Martin Farrall(Broad Institute), Stuart A. Cook(Centre for Human Genetics), Hugh Watkins(Centre for Human Genetics)
Genetics in Medicine
August 17, 2016
Cited by 755Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

PURPOSE: The accurate interpretation of variation in Mendelian disease genes has lagged behind data generation as sequencing has become increasingly accessible. Ongoing large sequencing efforts present huge interpretive challenges, but they also provide an invaluable opportunity to characterize the spectrum and importance of rare variation. METHODS: We analyzed sequence data from 7,855 clinical cardiomyopathy cases and 60,706 Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) reference samples to obtain a better understanding of genetic variation in a representative autosomal dominant disorder. RESULTS: We found that in some genes previously reported as important causes of a given cardiomyopathy, rare variation is not clinically informative because there is an unacceptably high likelihood of false-positive interpretation. By contrast, in other genes, we find that diagnostic laboratories may be overly conservative when assessing variant pathogenicity. CONCLUSIONS: We outline improved analytical approaches that evaluate which genes and variant classes are interpretable and propose that these will increase the clinical utility of testing across a range of Mendelian diseases.Genet Med 19 2, 192-203.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis