English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Genetic diseases are leading causes of childhood mortality. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-exome sequencing (WES) are relatively new methods for diagnosing genetic diseases, whereas chromosomal microarray (CMA) is well established. Here we compared the diagnostic utility (rate of causative, pathogenic, or likely pathogenic genotypes in known disease genes) and clinical utility (proportion in whom medical or surgical management was changed by diagnosis) of WGS, WES, and CMA in children with suspected genetic diseases by systematic review of the literature (January 2011–August 2017) and meta-analysis, following MOOSE/PRISMA guidelines. In 37 studies, comprising 20,068 children, diagnostic utility of WGS (0.41, 95% CI 0.34–0.48,  I  2  = 44%) and WES (0.36, 95% CI 0.33–0.40,  I  2  = 83%) were qualitatively greater than CMA (0.10, 95% CI 0.08–0.12,  I  2  = 81%). Among studies published in 2017, the diagnostic utility of WGS was significantly greater than CMA ( P  < 0.0001,  I  2  = 13% and  I  2  = 40%, respectively). Among studies featuring within-cohort comparisons, the diagnostic utility of WES was significantly greater than CMA ( P  < 0.001,  I  2  = 36%). The diagnostic utility of WGS and WES were not significantly different. In studies featuring within-cohort comparisons of WGS/WES, the likelihood of diagnosis was significantly greater for trios than singletons (odds ratio 2.04, 95% CI 1.62–2.56,  I  2  = 12%;  P  < 0.0001). Diagnostic utility of WGS/WES with hospital-based interpretation (0.42, 95% CI 0.38–0.45,  I  2  = 48%) was qualitatively higher than that of reference laboratories (0.29, 95% CI 0.27–0.31,  I  2  = 49%); this difference was significant among studies published in 2017 ( P  < .0001,  I  2  = 22% and  I  2  = 26%, respectively). The clinical utility of WGS (0.27, 95% CI 0.17–0.40,  I  2  = 54%) and WES (0.17, 95% CI 0.12–0.24,  I  2  = 76%) were higher than CMA (0.06, 95% CI 0.05–0.07,  I  2  = 42%); this difference was significant for WGS vs CMA ( P  < 0.0001). In conclusion, in children with suspected genetic diseases, the diagnostic and clinical utility of WGS/WES were greater than CMA. Subgroups with higher WGS/WES diagnostic utility were trios and those receiving hospital-based interpretation. WGS/WES should be considered a first-line genomic test for children with suspected genetic diseases.

npj genomic medicine

Meta-analysis of the diagnostic and clinical utility of genome and exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with suspected genetic diseases