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

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has altered clinical genetic testing by widening the access to molecular diagnosis of genetically determined rare diseases. However, physicians may face difficulties selecting the best diagnostic approach. Our goal is to estimate the rate of possible molecular diagnoses missed by different targeted gene panels using data from a cohort of patients with rare genetic diseases diagnosed with exome sequencing (ES). For this purpose, we simulated a comparison between different targeted gene panels and ES: the list of genes harboring clinically relevant variants from 158 patients was used to estimate the theoretical rate of diagnoses missed by NGS panels from 53 different NGS panels from eight different laboratories. Panels presented a mean rate of missed diagnoses of 64% (range 14%-100%) compared to ES, representing an average predicted sensitivity of 36%. Metabolic abnormalities represented the group with highest mean of missed diagnoses (86%), while seizure represented the group with lowest mean (46%). Focused gene panels are restricted in covering select sets of genes implicated in specific diseases and they may miss molecular diagnoses of rare diseases compared to ES. However, their role in genetic diagnosis remains important especially for well-known genetic diseases with established genetic locus heterogeneity.

Exome sequencing and targeted gene panels: a simulated comparison of diagnostic yield using data from 158 patients with rare diseases