Clinical utility of regions of homozygosity (ROH) identified in exome sequencing: when to pursue confirmatory uniparental disomy testing for imprinting disorders?

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1515/cclm-2024-0239
Xiaoyan Huo, Xinyi Lu, Deyun Lu, Huili Liu, Yi Liu, Qianfeng Zhao, Yu Sun, Weiqian Dai, Wenjuan Qiu, Yongguo Yu, Yanjie Fan
{"title":"Clinical utility of regions of homozygosity (ROH) identified in exome sequencing: when to pursue confirmatory uniparental disomy testing for imprinting disorders?","authors":"Xiaoyan Huo, Xinyi Lu, Deyun Lu, Huili Liu, Yi Liu, Qianfeng Zhao, Yu Sun, Weiqian Dai, Wenjuan Qiu, Yongguo Yu, Yanjie Fan","doi":"10.1515/cclm-2024-0239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Regions of homozygosity (ROH) could implicate uniparental disomy (UPD) on specific chromosomes associated with imprinting disorders. Though the algorithms for ROH detection in exome sequencing (ES) have been developed, optimal reporting thresholds and when to pursue confirmatory UPD testing for imprinting disorders remain in ambiguity. This study used a data-driven approach to assess optimal reporting thresholds of ROH in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ROH analysis was performed using Automap in a retrospective cohort of 8,219 patients and a prospective cohort of 1,964 patients with ES data. Cases with ROH on imprinting-disorders related chromosomes were selected for additional methylation-specific confirmatory testing. The diagnostic yield, the ROH pattern of eventually diagnosed cases and optimal thresholds for confirmatory testing were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the retrospective analysis, 15 true UPD cases of imprinting disorders were confirmed among 51 suspected cases by ROH detection. Pattern of ROH differed between confirmed UPD and non-UPD cases. Maximized yield and minimized false discovery rate of confirmatory UPD testing was achieved at the thresholds of >20 Mb or >25 % chromosomal coverage for interstitial ROH, and >5 Mb for terminal ROH. Current recommendation by ACMG was nearly optimal, though refined thresholds as proposed in this study could reduce the workload by 31 % without losing any true UPD diagnosis. Our refined thresholds remained optimal after independent evaluation in a prospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ROH identified in ES could implicate the presence of clinically relevant UPD. This study recommended size and coverage thresholds for confirmatory UPD testing after ROH detection in ES, contributing to the development of evidence-based reporting guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":10390,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-0239","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Regions of homozygosity (ROH) could implicate uniparental disomy (UPD) on specific chromosomes associated with imprinting disorders. Though the algorithms for ROH detection in exome sequencing (ES) have been developed, optimal reporting thresholds and when to pursue confirmatory UPD testing for imprinting disorders remain in ambiguity. This study used a data-driven approach to assess optimal reporting thresholds of ROH in clinical practice.

Methods: ROH analysis was performed using Automap in a retrospective cohort of 8,219 patients and a prospective cohort of 1,964 patients with ES data. Cases with ROH on imprinting-disorders related chromosomes were selected for additional methylation-specific confirmatory testing. The diagnostic yield, the ROH pattern of eventually diagnosed cases and optimal thresholds for confirmatory testing were analyzed.

Results: In the retrospective analysis, 15 true UPD cases of imprinting disorders were confirmed among 51 suspected cases by ROH detection. Pattern of ROH differed between confirmed UPD and non-UPD cases. Maximized yield and minimized false discovery rate of confirmatory UPD testing was achieved at the thresholds of >20 Mb or >25 % chromosomal coverage for interstitial ROH, and >5 Mb for terminal ROH. Current recommendation by ACMG was nearly optimal, though refined thresholds as proposed in this study could reduce the workload by 31 % without losing any true UPD diagnosis. Our refined thresholds remained optimal after independent evaluation in a prospective cohort.

Conclusions: ROH identified in ES could implicate the presence of clinically relevant UPD. This study recommended size and coverage thresholds for confirmatory UPD testing after ROH detection in ES, contributing to the development of evidence-based reporting guidelines.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外显子测序中发现的同源性区域 (ROH) 的临床实用性:何时进行印记疾病的单亲断裂确证检测?
目的:同源性区域(ROH)可能涉及与印记疾病相关的特定染色体上的单亲裂殖(UPD)。虽然外显子组测序(ES)中的ROH检测算法已经开发出来,但最佳报告阈值以及何时进行印记疾病的确证性UPD检测仍不明确。本研究采用数据驱动法评估临床实践中ROH的最佳报告阈值:方法:使用 Automap 对 8,219 例回顾性队列患者和 1,964 例具有 ES 数据的前瞻性队列患者进行了 ROH 分析。筛选出印记紊乱相关染色体上有 ROH 的病例,进行额外的甲基化特异性确证检测。分析了诊断率、最终确诊病例的 ROH 模式和确证检测的最佳阈值:结果:在回顾性分析中,51 例疑似病例中通过 ROH 检测确诊了 15 例真正的印记障碍 UPD 病例。在确诊的 UPD 病例和非 UPD 病例中,ROH 的模式有所不同。间期ROH的阈值>20 Mb或染色体覆盖率>25%,末期ROH的阈值>5 Mb时,UPD确诊检测的产量最大,误诊率最低。ACMG 目前的建议几乎是最佳的,但本研究提出的改进阈值可将工作量减少 31%,而不会丢失任何真正的 UPD 诊断。在前瞻性队列中进行独立评估后,我们改进后的阈值仍然是最佳的:结论:在 ES 中识别出的 ROH 可提示存在临床相关的 UPD。本研究推荐了在 ES 中检测到 ROH 后进行确诊 UPD 检测的规模和覆盖阈值,有助于制定循证报告指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
16.20%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) publishes articles on novel teaching and training methods applicable to laboratory medicine. CCLM welcomes contributions on the progress in fundamental and applied research and cutting-edge clinical laboratory medicine. It is one of the leading journals in the field, with an impact factor over 3. CCLM is issued monthly, and it is published in print and electronically. CCLM is the official journal of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and publishes regularly EFLM recommendations and news. CCLM is the official journal of the National Societies from Austria (ÖGLMKC); Belgium (RBSLM); Germany (DGKL); Hungary (MLDT); Ireland (ACBI); Italy (SIBioC); Portugal (SPML); and Slovenia (SZKK); and it is affiliated to AACB (Australia) and SFBC (France). Topics: - clinical biochemistry - clinical genomics and molecular biology - clinical haematology and coagulation - clinical immunology and autoimmunity - clinical microbiology - drug monitoring and analysis - evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers - disease-oriented topics (cardiovascular disease, cancer diagnostics, diabetes) - new reagents, instrumentation and technologies - new methodologies - reference materials and methods - reference values and decision limits - quality and safety in laboratory medicine - translational laboratory medicine - clinical metrology Follow @cclm_degruyter on Twitter!
期刊最新文献
Iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia in transgender populations: what's different? CD34+ progenitor cells meet metrology. Expanded carrier screening for 224 monogenic disease genes in 1,499 Chinese couples: a single-center study. Allowable total error in CD34 cell analysis by flow cytometry based on state of the art using Spanish EQAS data. Comparison of capillary finger stick and venous blood sampling for 34 routine chemistry analytes: potential for in the hospital and remote blood sampling.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1