Surabhi Mulchandani

Actionable exomic incidental findings in 6503 participants: challenges of variant classification

Recommendations for laboratories to report incidental findings from genomic tests have stimulated interest in such results. In order to investigate the criteria and processes for assigning the pathogenicity of specific variants and to estimate the frequency of such incidental findings in patients of European and African ancestry, we classified potentially actionable pathogenic single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) in all 4300 European- and 2203 African-ancestry participants sequenced by the NHLBI Exome Sequencing Project (ESP). We considered 112 gene-disease pairs selected by an expert panel as associated with medically actionable genetic disorders that may be undiagnosed in adults. The resulting classifications were compared to classifications from other clinical and research genetic testing laboratories, as well as with in silico pathogenicity scores. Among European-ancestry participants, 30 of 4300 (0.7%) had a pathogenic SNV and six (0.1%) had a disruptive variant that was expected to be pathogenic, whereas 52 (1.2%) had likely pathogenic SNVs. For African-ancestry participants, six of 2203 (0.3%) had a pathogenic SNV and six (0.3%) had an expected pathogenic disruptive variant, whereas 13 (0.6%) had likely pathogenic SNVs. Genomic Evolutionary Rate Profiling mammalian conservation score and the Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion summary score of conservation, substitution, regulation, and other evidence were compared across pathogenicity assignments and appear to have utility in variant classification. This work provides a refined estimate of the burden of adult onset, medically actionable incidental findings expected from exome sequencing, highlights challenges in variant classification, and demonstrates the need for a better curated variant interpretation knowledge base.

“What does it mean?”: Uncertainties in understanding results of chromosomal microarray testing

Purpose:The increased sensitivity of chromosomal microarray (CMA) technology as compared with traditional cytogenetic analysis allows for improved detection of genomic alterations. However, there is potential for uncertainty in the interpretation of test results in some cases. This paper explores how families understand and make meaning of CMA test results, and identifies the needs of families undergoing CMA testing.Methods:We conducted semistructured interviews with parents of 25 pediatric outpatients with CMA test results indicating either a pathogenic alteration or a variant of unknown significance (VUS). Interviews were analyzed qualitatively.Results:Three domains of understanding were identified: comprehension of results, interpretations of scientific uncertainty, and personal meaning for the child and family. Incomplete comprehension of test results and scientific uncertainty were prominent themes for families receiving results in both the VUS and pathogenic categories. Receiving results from non-geneticists and by telephone, long waits to see a geneticist, and misleading Internet searches all contributed to misunderstandings.Conclusion:Differentiating domains of understanding allows for the identification of uncertainties that can be reduced or managed in order to improve understanding of CMA results. Using this framework, we suggest interventions to promote clarity and address the informational needs of families undergoing CMA testing.Genet Med 2012:14(2):250–258

Interstitial microduplication of Xp22.31: Causative of intellectual disability or benign copy number variant?

The use of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays has dramatically altered the approach to identification of genetic alterations that can explain intellectual disability and /or congenital anomalies. However, the discovery of numerous copy number changes with benign or unknown clinical significance has made interpretation problematic. Submicroscopic duplication of Xp22.31 has been reported as either a possible cause of intellectual disability and/or developmental delay or a benign variant. Here we report 29 individuals with the microduplication found as part of microarray analysis of 7793 samples submitted to an international group of 13 clinical laboratories. The referral reasons varied and included developmental delay, intellectual disability, autism, dysmorphic features and/or multiple congenital anomalies. The size of the Xp22.31 duplication varied between 149 kb and 1.74 Mb and included the steroid sulfatase (STS) gene with the male to female ratio of 0.7. Duplication within this segment is seen at a frequency of 0.15% in a healthy control population, whereas a frequency of 0.37% was observed in our cohort of individuals with abnormal phenotypes. We present a detailed comparison of the breakpoints, inheritance, X-inactivation and clinical phenotype in our cohort and a review of the literature for a total of 41 patients. To date, this report is the largest compilation of clinical and array data regarding the microduplication of Xp22.31 and will serve to broaden the knowledge of regions involving copy number variation (CNV).

Clinical Features of Three Girls With Mosaic Genome-Wide Paternal Uniparental Isodisomy

Here we describe three subjects with mosaic genome‐wide paternal uniparental isodisomy (GWpUPD) each of whom presented initially with overgrowth, hemihyperplasia (HH), and hyperinsulinism (HI). Due to the severity of findings and the presence of additional features, SNP array testing was performed, which demonstrated mosaic GWpUPD. Comparing these individuals to 10 other live‐born subjects reported in the literature, the predominant phenotype is that of pUPD11 and notable for a very high incidence of tumor development. Our subjects developed non‐metastatic tumors of the adrenal gland, kidney, and/or liver. All three subjects had pancreatic hyperplasia resulting in HI. Notably, our subjects to date display minimal features of other diseases associated with paternal UPD loci. Both children who survived the neonatal period have displayed near‐normal cognitive development, likely due to a favorable tissue distribution of the mosaicism. To understand the range of UPD mosaicism levels, we studied multiple tissues using SNP array analysis and detected levels of 5–95%, roughly correlating with the extent of tissue involvement. Given the rapidity of tumor growth and the difficulty distinguishing malignant and benign tumors in these GWpUPD subjects, we have utilized increased frequency of ultrasound (US) and alpha‐fetoprotein (AFP) screening in the first years of life. Because of a later age of onset of additional tumors, continued tumor surveillance into adolescence may need to be considered in these rare patients.

Maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 20: a novel imprinting disorder of growth failure

Purpose:Maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 20 (UPD(20)mat) has been reported in only four patients, three of whom also had mosaicism for complete or partial trisomy of chromosome 20. We sought to evaluate the clinical significance of isolated UPD(20)mat in eight individuals.Methods:We evaluated phenotypic and genomic findings of a series of eight new patients with UPD(20)mat.Results:All eight individuals with UPD(20)mat had intrauterine growth restriction, short stature, and prominent feeding difficulties with failure to thrive. As a common feature, they often required gastric tube feeds. Genomic data in most patients are indicative of UPD as a result of trisomy rescue after meiosis II nondisjunction.Conclusion:We describe the first natural history of the disorder and the results of therapeutic interventions, including the frequent requirement of direct gastric feedings only during the first few years of life, and propose that growth hormone supplementation is probably safe and effective for this condition. We suggest that UPD(20)mat can be regarded as a new imprinting disorder and its identification requires specialized molecular testing, which should be performed in patients with early-onset idiopathic isolated growth failure.Genet Med 18 4, 309–315.

Parents’ Perceptions of the Usefulness of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Clinical guidelines recommend chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for all children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). We explored the test’s perceived usefulness among parents of children with ASD who had undergone CMA, and received a result categorized as pathogenic, variant of uncertain significance, or negative. Fifty-seven parents participated in a semi-structured telephone interview, and 50 also completed a survey. Most parents reported that CMA was helpful for their child and family. Major themes regarding perceived usefulness were: medical care, educational and behavioral interventions, causal explanation, information for family members, and advancing knowledge. Limits to utility, uncertainties and negative outcomes were also identified. Our findings highlight the importance of considering both health and non-health related utility in genomic testing.

Subtelomeric deletion of chromosome 10p15.3: clinical findings and molecular cytogenetic characterization.

We describe 19 unrelated individuals with submicroscopic deletions involving 10p15.3 characterized by chromosomal microarray (CMA). Interestingly, to our knowledge, only two individuals with isolated, submicroscopic 10p15.3 deletion have been reported to date; however, only limited clinical information is available for these probands and the deleted region has not been molecularly mapped. Comprehensive clinical history was obtained for 12 of the 19 individuals described in this study. Common features among these 12 individuals include: cognitive/behavioral/developmental differences (11/11), speech delay/language disorder (10/10), motor delay (10/10), craniofacial dysmorphism (9/12), hypotonia (7/11), brain anomalies (4/6) and seizures (3/7). Parental studies were performed for nine of the 19 individuals; the 10p15.3 deletion was de novo in seven of the probands, not maternally inherited in one proband and inherited from an apparently affected mother in one proband. Molecular mapping of the 19 individuals reported in this study has identified two genes, ZMYND11 (OMIM 608668) and DIP2C (OMIM 611380; UCSC Genome Browser), mapping within 10p15.3 which are most commonly deleted. Although no single gene has been identified which is deleted in all 19 individuals studied, the deleted region in all but one individual includes ZMYND11 and the deleted region in all but one other individual includes DIP2C. There is not a clearly identifiable phenotypic difference between these two individuals and the size of the deleted region does not generally predict clinical features. Little is currently known about these genes complicating a direct genotype/phenotype correlation at this time. These data however, suggest that ZMYND11 and/or DIP2C haploinsufficiency contributes to the clinical features associated with 10p15 deletions in probands described in this study.

A Qualitative Study of Healthcare Providers’ Perspectives on the Implications of Genome-Wide Testing in Pediatric Clinical Practice

The utilization of genome-wide chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in pediatric clinical practice provides an opportunity to consider how genetic diagnostics is evolving, and to prepare for the clinical integration of genome-wide sequencing technologies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 healthcare providers (7 genetic counselors, 4 medical geneticists, and 4 non-genetics providers) to investigate the impact of CMA on clinical practice, and implications for providers, patients and families. Interviews were analyzed qualitatively using content analysis. Most providers reported that genomic testing enhanced their professional experience and was beneficial to patients, primarily due to the improved diagnostic rate compared with earlier chromosomal studies. Other effects on practice included moving towards genotype-first diagnosis and broadening indications for chromosomal testing. Opinions varied concerning informed consent and disclosure of results. The duty to disclose incidental findings (IFs) was noted; however concerns were raised about potential psychosocial harms of disclosing pre-symptomatic findings. Tensions were revealed between the need for comprehensive informed consent for all families and the challenges of communicating time-consuming and potentially anxiety-provoking information regarding uncertain and incidental findings that may be relevant only in rare cases. Genetic counselors can play an important role in liaising with families, health professionals and testing laboratories, providing education and guidance to non-genetics providers, and enabling families to receive adequate pre-and post-test information and follow-up care.

Bilateral Pheochromocytomas, Hemihyperplasia, and Subtle Somatic Mosaicism: The Importance of Detecting Low-Level Uniparental Disomy

We report on a patient with early onset pediatric bilateral pheochromocytomas caused by mosaic chromosome 11p15 paternal uniparental isodisomy (UPD). Hemihyperplasia of the arm was diagnosed in a 4‐month‐old female and clinical methylation testing for 11p15 in the blood was normal, with a reported detection threshold for mosaicism of 20%. She was subsequently diagnosed at 18 months with bilateral pheochromocytomas. Single‐nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array analysis of pheochromocytoma tissue demonstrated mosaic deletions of 8p12pter, 21q21.1qter, 22q11.23qter; commonly seen in pheochromocytomas. In addition, mosaic 11p15.3pter homozygosity was noted. Molecular testing for other causes of pheochromocytomas was normal, suggesting that 11p15 homozygosity was the primary event. Subsequent SNP array analysis of skin fibroblasts from the hyperplastic side demonstrated 5% mosaic paternal UPD for 11p15. We have subsequently used SNP array analysis to identify four patients with subtle hemihyperplasia with low‐level mosaic UPD that was not detected by methylation analysis. Given the increased sensitivity of SNP array analysis to detect UPD along with the increased incidence of tumorigenesis in these UPD patients, we suggest that it has high utility in the clinical work‐up of hemihyperplasia. The present case also suggests that 11p15 paternal UPD may be an under‐detected mechanism of sporadic pheochromocytoma in the pediatric population. Furthermore, a review of the literature suggests that patients with 11p15 paternal UPD may present after 8 years of age with pheochromocytoma and raises the possibility that ultrasound screening could be considered beyond 8 years of age in this subset of hemihyperplasia and Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome patients.

Mosaic maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 15 in Prader-Willi syndrome: utility of genome-wide SNP array.

Prader–Willi syndrome is caused by the loss of paternal gene expression on 15q11.2–q13.2, and one of the mechanisms resulting in Prader–Willi syndrome phenotype is maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 15. Various mechanisms including trisomy rescue, monosomy rescue, and post fertilization errors can lead to uniparental disomy, and its mechanism can be inferred from the pattern of uniparental hetero and isodisomy. Detection of a mosaic cell line provides a unique opportunity to understand the mechanism of uniparental disomy; however, mosaic uniparental disomy is a rare finding in patients with Prader–Willi syndrome. We report on two infants with Prader–Willi syndrome caused by mosaic maternal uniparental disomy 15. Patient 1 has mosaic uniparental isodisomy of the entire chromosome 15, and Patient 2 has mosaic uniparental mixed iso/heterodisomy 15. Genome‐wide single‐nucleotide polymorphism array was able to demonstrate the presence of chromosomally normal cell line in the Patient 1 and trisomic cell line in Patient 2, and provide the evidence that post‐fertilization error and trisomy rescue as a mechanism of uniparental disomy in each case, respectively. Given its ability of detecting small percent mosaicism as well as its capability of identifying the loss of heterozygosity of chromosomal regions, genome‐wide single‐nucleotide polymorphism array should be utilized as an adjunct to the standard methylation analysis in the evaluation of Prader–Willi syndrome.