Clinical impact of genomic testing in patients with suspected monogenic kidney disease

Kushani Jayasinghe(Monash Medical Centre), Zornitza Stark(The University of Melbourne), Peter G. Kerr(Monash Medical Centre), Clara Gaff(The University of Melbourne), Melissa Martyn(Murdoch Children's Research Institute), John Whitlam(Austin Health), Belinda Creighton(Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre), Elizabeth Donaldson(The Royal Melbourne Hospital), Matthew F. Hunter(Monash Health), Anna Jarmolowicz(The Royal Melbourne Hospital), Lilian Johnstone(Monash Children’s Hospital), Emma Krzesinski(Monash Health), Sebastian Lunke(Victorian Clinical Genetics Services), Elly Lynch(Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance), Kathy Nicholls(Melbourne Health), Chirag Patel(Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital), Yael Prawer(Monash Health), Jessica Ryan(Monash Medical Centre), Emily See(The University of Melbourne), Andrew Talbot(Melbourne Health), Alison H. Trainer(The Royal Melbourne Hospital), Rigan Tytherleigh(Murdoch Children's Research Institute), Giulia Valente(Austin Health), Mathew Wallis(University of Tasmania), Louise Wardrop(Murdoch Children's Research Institute), Kirsty West(The Royal Melbourne Hospital), Susan M. White(The University of Melbourne), Ella Wilkins(Victorian Clinical Genetics Services), Andrew J. Mallett(The University of Queensland), Catherine Quinlan(Royal Children's Hospital)
Genetics in Medicine
September 17, 2020
Cited by 125Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic yield and clinical impact of exome sequencing (ES) in patients with suspected monogenic kidney disease. METHODS: We performed clinically accredited singleton ES in a prospectively ascertained cohort of 204 patients assessed in multidisciplinary renal genetics clinics at four tertiary hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: ES identified a molecular diagnosis in 80 (39%) patients, encompassing 35 distinct genetic disorders. Younger age at presentation was independently associated with an ES diagnosis (p < 0.001). Of those diagnosed, 31/80 (39%) had a change in their clinical diagnosis. ES diagnosis was considered to have contributed to management in 47/80 (59%), including negating the need for diagnostic renal biopsy in 10/80 (13%), changing surveillance in 35/80 (44%), and changing the treatment plan in 16/80 (20%). In cases with no change to management in the proband, the ES result had implications for the management of family members in 26/33 (79%). Cascade testing was subsequently offered to 40/80 families (50%). CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic pediatric and adult cohort with suspected monogenic kidney disease, ES had high diagnostic and clinical utility. Our findings, including predictors of positive diagnosis, can be used to guide clinical practice and health service design.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis