Clinical heterogeneity associated with KCNA1 mutations include cataplexy and nonataxic presentations

Mutations in the KCNA1 gene are known to cause episodic ataxia/myokymia syndrome type 1 (EA1). Here, we describe two families with unique presentations who were enrolled in an IRB-approved study, extensively phenotyped, and whole exome sequencing (WES) performed. Family 1 had a diagnosis of isolated cataplexy triggered by sudden physical exertion in multiple affected individuals with heterogeneous neurological findings. All enrolled affected members carried a KCNA1 c.941T>C (p.I314T) mutation. Family 2 had an 8-year-old patient with muscle spasms with rigidity for whom WES revealed a previously reported heterozygous missense mutation in KCNA1 c.677C>G (p.T226R), confirming the diagnosis of EA1 without ataxia. WES identified variants in KCNA1 that explain both phenotypes expanding the phenotypic spectrum of diseases associated with mutations of this gene. KCNA1 mutations should be considered in patients of all ages with episodic neurological phenotypes, even when ataxia is not present. This is an example of the power of genomic approaches to identify pathogenic mutations in unsuspected genes responsible for heterogeneous diseases

An international effort towards developing standards for best practices in analysis, interpretation and reporting of clinical genome sequencing results in the CLARITY challenge

Background: There is tremendous potential for genome sequencing to improve clinical diagnosis and care once it becomes routinely accessible, but this will require formalizing research methods into clinical best practices in the areas of sequence data generation, analysis, interpretation and reporting. The CLARITY Challenge was designed to spur convergence in methods for diagnosing genetic disease starting from clinical case history and genome sequencing data. DNA samples were obtained from three families with heritable genetic disorders and genomic sequence data were donated by sequencing platform vendors. The challenge was to analyze and interpret these data with the goals of identifying disease-causing variants and reporting the findings in a clinically useful format. Participating contestant groups were solicited broadly, and an independent panel of judges evaluated their performance. Results: A total of 30 international groups were engaged. The entries reveal a general convergence of practices on most elements of the analysis and interpretation process. However, even given this commonality of approach, only two groups identified the consensus candidate variants in all disease cases, demonstrating a need for consistent fine-tuning of the generally accepted methods. There was greater diversity of the final clinical report content and in the patient consenting process, demonstrating that these areas require additional exploration and standardization. Conclusions: The CLARITY Challenge provides a comprehensive assessment of current practices for using genome sequencing to diagnose and report genetic diseases. There is remarkable convergence in bioinformatic techniques, but medical interpretation and reporting are areas that require further development by many groups

An international effort towards developing standards for best practices in analysis, interpretation and reporting of clinical genome sequencing results in the CLARITY Challenge

There is tremendous potential for genome sequencing to improve clinical diagnosis and care once it becomes routinely accessible, but this will require formalizing research methods into clinical best practices in the areas of sequence data generation, analysis, interpretation and reporting. The CLARITY Challenge was designed to spur convergence in methods for diagnosing genetic disease starting from clinical case history and genome sequencing data. DNA samples were obtained from three families with heritable genetic disorders and genomic sequence data were donated by sequencing platform vendors. The challenge was to analyze and interpret these data with the goals of identifying disease-causing variants and reporting the findings in a clinically useful format. Participating contestant groups were solicited broadly, and an independent panel of judges evaluated their performance. RESULTS: A total of 30 international groups were engaged. The entries reveal a general convergence of practices on most elements of the analysis and interpretation process. However, even given this commonality of approach, only two groups identified the consensus candidate variants in all disease cases, demonstrating a need for consistent fine-tuning of the generally accepted methods. There was greater diversity of the final clinical report content and in the patient consenting process, demonstrating that these areas require additional exploration and standardization. CONCLUSIONS: The CLARITY Challenge provides a comprehensive assessment of current practices for using genome sequencing to diagnose and report genetic diseases. There is remarkable convergence in bioinformatic techniques, but medical interpretation and reporting are areas that require further development by many groups

Spliceosome malfunction causes neurodevelopmental disorders with overlapping features

Pre-mRNA splicing is a highly coordinated process. While its dysregulation has been linked to neurological deficits, our understanding of the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms remains limited. We implicated pathogenic variants in U2AF2 and PRPF19, encoding spliceosome subunits in neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), by identifying 46 unrelated individuals with 23 de novo U2AF2 missense variants (including 7 recurrent variants in 30 individuals) and 6 individuals with de novo PRPF19 variants. Eight U2AF2 variants dysregulated splicing of a model substrate. Neuritogenesis was reduced in human neurons differentiated from human pluripotent stem cells carrying two U2AF2 hyper-recurrent variants. Neural loss of function (LoF) of the Drosophila orthologs U2af50 and Prp19 led to lethality, abnormal mushroom body (MB) patterning, and social deficits, which were differentially rescued by wild-type and mutant U2AF2 or PRPF19. Transcriptome profiling revealed splicing substrates or effectors (including Rbfox1, a third splicing factor), which rescued MB defects in U2af50deficient flies. Upon reanalysis of negative clinical exomes followed by data sharing, we further identified 6 patients with NDD who carried RBFOX1 missense variants which, by in vitro testing, showed LoF. Our study implicates 3 splicing factors as NDD-causative genes and establishes a genetic network with hierarchy underlying human brain development and function

Expectation versus Reality: The Impact of Utility on Emotional Outcomes after Returning Individualized Genetic Research Results in Pediatric Rare Disease Research, a Qualitative Interview Study

Purpose Much information on parental perspectives on the return of individual research results (IRR) in pediatric genomic research is based on hypothetical rather than actual IRR. Our aim was to understand how the expected utility to parents who received IRR on their child from a genetic research study compared to the actual utility of the IRR received. Methods: We conducted individual telephone interviews with parents who received IRR on their child through participation in the Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research Gene Discovery Core (GDC) at Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH). Results: Five themes emerged around the utility that parents expected and actually received from IRR: predictability, management, family planning, finding answers, and helping science and/or families. Parents expressing negative or mixed emotions after IRR return were those who did not receive the utility they expected from the IRR. Conversely, parents who expressed positive emotions were those who received as much or greater utility than expected. Conclusions: Discrepancies between expected and actual utility of IRR affect the experiences of parents and families enrolled in genetic research studies. An informed consent process that fosters realistic expectations between researchers and participants may help to minimize any negative impact on parents and families

Parent Emotion Categories and Actual vs. Expected Utility Groupings.

<p>Parent Emotion Categories and Actual vs. Expected Utility Groupings.</p

Participant and Child Demographics.

<p>Participant and Child Demographics.</p