Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics

The Korean Pediatric Society (대한소아청소년과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Genetic tests by next-generation sequencing in children with developmental delay and/or intellectual disability

  • Han, Ji Yoon (Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Lee, In Goo (Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2019.07.15
  • Accepted : 2019.10.24
  • Published : 2020.06.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Developments in next-generation sequencing (NGS) techogies have assisted in clarifying the diagnosis and treatment of developmental delay/intellectual disability (DD/ID) via molecular genetic testing. Advances in DNA sequencing technology have not only allowed the evolution of targeted panels but also, and more currently enabled genome-wide analyses to progress from research era to clinical practice. Broad acceptance of accuracy-guided targeted gene panel, whole-exome sequencing (WES), and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) for DD/ID need prospective analyses of the increasing cost-effectiveness versus conventional genetic testing. Choosing the appropriate sequencing method requires individual planning. Data are required to guide best-practice recommendations for genomic testing, regarding various clinical phenotypes in an etiologic approach. Targeted panel testing may be recommended as a firsttier testing approach for children with DD/ID. Family-based trio testing by WES/WGS can be used as a second test for DD/ID in undiagnosed children who previously tested negative on a targeted panel. The role of NGS in molecular diagnostics, treatment, prediction of prognosis will continue to increase further in the coming years. Given the rapid pace of changes in the past 10 years, all medical providers should be aware of the changes in the transformative genetics field.

Keywords

References

  1. Newschaffer CJ, Croen LA, Daniels J, Giarelli E, Grether JK, Levy SE, et al. The epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders. Annu Rev Public Health 2007;28:235-58. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144007
  2. Srour M, Shevell M. Genetics and the investigation of developmental delay/intellectual disability. Arch Dis Child 2014;99:386-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2013-304063
  3. Shevell M, Ashwal S, Donley D, Flint J, Gingold M, Hirtz D, et al. Practice parameter: evaluation of the child with global developmental delay: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and The Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. Neurology 2003;60:367-80. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000031431.81555.16
  4. Sanger F, Nicklen S, Coulson AR. DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1977;74:5463-7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.74.12.5463
  5. Metzker ML. Sequencing technologies - the next generation. Nat Rev Genet 2010;11:31-46. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2626
  6. Slatko BE, Gardner AF, Ausubel FM. Overview of next-generation sequencing technologies. Curr Protoc Mol Biol 2018;122:e59.
  7. Rehm HL, Bale SJ, Bayrak-Toydemir P, Berg JS, Brown KK, Deignan JL, et al. ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing. Genet Med 2013;15:733-47. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.92
  8. Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S, Biesecker LG, Brothman AR, Carter NP, et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet 2010;86:749-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.04.006
  9. O'Byrne JJ, Lynch SA, Treacy EP, King MD, Betts DR, Mayne PD, et al. Unexplained developmental delay/learning disability: guidelines for best practice protocol for first line assessment and genetic/metabolic/radiological investigations. Ir J Med Sci 2016;185:241-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-015-1284-7
  10. Li Y, Anderson LA, Ginns EI, Devlin JJ. Cost effectiveness of karyotyping, chromosomal microarray analysis, and targeted next-generation sequencing of patients with unexplained global developmental delay or intellectual disability. Mol Diagn Ther 2018;22:129-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40291-017-0309-5
  11. Shashi V, McConkie-Rosell A, Rosell B, Schoch K, Vellore K, McDonald M, et al. The utility of the traditional medical genetics diagnostic evaluation in the context of next-generation sequencing for undiagnosed genetic disorders. Genet Med 2014;16:176-82. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.99
  12. van Karnebeek CD, Scheper FY, Abeling NG, Alders M, Barth PG, Hoovers JM, et al. Etiology of mental retardation in children referred to a tertiary care center: a prospective study. Am J Ment Retard 2005;110:253-67. https://doi.org/10.1352/0895-8017(2005)110[253:EOMRIC]2.0.CO;2
  13. Hunter AG. Outcome of the routine assessment of patients with mental retardation in a genetics clinic. Am J Med Genet 2000;90:60-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8628(20000103)90:1<60::AID-AJMG11>3.0.CO;2-P
  14. Schaefer GB, Lutz RE. Diagnostic yield in the clinical genetic evaluation of autism spectrum disorders. Genet Med 2006;8:549-56. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.gim.0000237789.98842.f1
  15. Moog U. The outcome of diagnostic studies on the etiology of mental retardation: considerations on the classification of the causes. Am J Med Genet A 2005;137:228-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.30841
  16. Mithyantha R, Kneen R, McCann E, Gladstone M. Current evidencebased recommendations on investigating children with global developmental delay. Arch Dis Child 2017;102:1071-6. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2016-311271
  17. Boycott KM, Vanstone MR, Bulman DE, MacKenzie AE. Rare-disease genetics in the era of next-generation sequencing: discovery to translation. Nat Rev Genet 2013;14:681-91. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3555
  18. Stavropoulos DJ, Merico D, Jobling R, Bowdin S, Monfared N, Thiruvahindrapuram B, et al. Whole genome sequencing expands diagnostic utility and improves clinical management in pediatric medicine. NPJ Genom Med 2016;1.
  19. Proost D, Vandeweyer G, Meester JA, Salemink S, Kempers M, Ingram C, et al. Performant mutation identification using targeted next-generation sequencing of 14 thoracic aortic aneurysm genes. Hum Mutat 2015;36:808-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.22802
  20. Vasudevan P, Suri M. A clinical approach to developmental delay and intellectual disability. Clin Med (Lond) 2017;17:558-61. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.17-6-558
  21. Soden SE, Saunders CJ, Willig LK, Farrow EG, Smith LD, Petrikin JE, et al. Effectiveness of exome and genome sequencing guided by acuity of illness for diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders. Sci Transl Med 2014;6:265ra168. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3010076
  22. Ankala A, da Silva C, Gualandi F, Ferlini A, Bean LJ, Collins C, et al. A comprehensive genomic approach for neuromuscular diseases gives a high diagnostic yield. Ann Neurol 2015;77:206-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24303
  23. Saudi Mendeliome Group. Comprehensive gene panels provide advantages over clinical exome sequencing for Mendelian diseases. Genome Biol 2015;16:134. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0693-2
  24. Lim EC, Brett M, Lai AH, Lee SP, Tan ES, Jamuar SS, et al. Next-generation sequencing using a pre-designed gene panel for the molecular diagnosis of congenital disorders in pediatric patients. Hum Genomics 2015;9:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40246-015-0055-x
  25. de Koning TJ, Jongbloed JD, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Sinke RJ. Targeted next-generation sequencing panels for monogenetic disorders in clinical diagnostics: the opportunities and challenges. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2015;15:61-70. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737159.2015.976555
  26. Wang W, Wang C, Dawson DB, Thorland EC, Lundquist PA, Eckloff BW, et al. Target-enrichment sequencing and copy number evaluation in inherited polyneuropathy. Neurology 2016;86:1762-71. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000002659
  27. Klein CJ, Middha S, Duan X, Wu Y, Litchy WJ, Gu W, et al. Application of whole exome sequencing in undiagnosed inherited polyneuropathies. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014;85:1265-72. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2013-306740
  28. Wang J, Gotway G, Pascual JM, Park JY. Diagnostic yield of clinical nextgeneration sequencing panels for epilepsy. JAMA Neurol 2014;71:650-1. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.405
  29. Consugar MB, Navarro-Gomez D, Place EM, Bujakowska KM, Sousa ME, Fonseca-Kelly ZD, et al. Panel-based genetic diagnostic testing for inherited eye diseases is highly accurate and reproducible, and more sensitive for variant detection, than exome sequencing. Genet Med 2015;17:253-61. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.172
  30. Behjati S, Tarpey PS. What is next generation sequencing? Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed 2013;98:236-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2013-304340
  31. Winkler EC, Wiemann S. Findings made in gene panel to whole genome sequencing: data, knowledge, ethics - and consequences? Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2016;16:1259-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2016.1212662
  32. Klein CJ, Foroud TM. Neurology individualized medicine: when to use next-generation sequencing panels. Mayo Clin Proc 2017;92:292-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.09.008
  33. Bamshad MJ, Ng SB, Bigham AW, Tabor HK, Emond MJ, Nickerson DA, et al. Exome sequencing as a tool for Mendelian disease gene discovery. Nat Rev Genet 2011;12:745-55. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3031
  34. Need AC, Shashi V, Schoch K, Petrovski S, Goldstein DB. The importance of dynamic re-analysis in diagnostic whole exome sequencing. J Med Genet 2017;54:155-6. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2016-104306
  35. Bowdin S, Gilbert A, Bedoukian E, Carew C, Adam MP, Belmont J, et al. Recommendations for the integration of genomics into clinical practice. Genet Med 2016;18:1075-84. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.17
  36. Farwell KD, Shahmirzadi L, El-Khechen D, Powis Z, Chao EC, Tippin Davis B, et al. Enhanced utility of family-centered diagnostic exome sequencing with inheritance model-based analysis: results from 500 unselected families with undiagnosed genetic conditions. Genet Med 2015;17:578-86. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.154
  37. Iglesias A, Anyane-Yeboa K, Wynn J, Wilson A, Truitt Cho M, Guzman E, et al. The usefulness of whole-exome sequencing in routine clinical practice. Genet Med 2014;16:922-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.58
  38. De Ligt J, Willemsen MH, Van Bon BW, Kleefstra T, Yntema HG, Kroes T, et al. Diagnostic exome sequencing in persons with severe intellectual disability. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1921-9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1206524
  39. Rauch A, Wieczorek D, Graf E, Wieland T, Endele S, Schwarzmayr T, et al. Range of genetic mutations associated with severe non-syndromic sporadic intellectual disability: an exome sequencing study. Lancet 2012;380:1674-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61480-9
  40. Trujillano D, Bertoli-Avella AM, Kumar Kandaswamy K, Weiss ME, Koster J, Marais A, et al. Clinical exome sequencing: results from 2819 samples reflecting 1000 families. Eur J Hum Genet 2017;25:176-82. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2016.146
  41. Lee H, Deignan JL, Dorrani N, Strom SP, Kantarci S, Quintero-Rivera F, et al. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA 2014;312:1880-7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.14604
  42. Wenger AM, Guturu H, Bernstein JA, Bejerano G. Systematic reanalysis of clinical exome data yields additional diagnoses: implications for providers. Genet Med 2017;19:209-14. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.88
  43. Parla JS, Iossifov I, Grabill I, Spector MS, Kramer M, McCombie WR. A comparative analysis of exome capture. Genome Biol 2011;12:R97. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-9-r97
  44. Xue Y, Ankala A, Wilcox WR, Hegde MR. Solving the molecular diagnostic testing conundrum for Mendelian disorders in the era of nextgeneration sequencing: single-gene, gene panel, or exome/genome sequencing. Genet Med 2015;17:444-51. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.122
  45. Clark MJ, Chen R, Lam HY, Karczewski KJ, Chen R, Euskirchen G, et al. Performance comparison of exome DNA sequencing technologies. Nat Biotechnol 2011;29:908-14. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1975
  46. Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Engl J Med 2014;370:2418-25. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1312543
  47. Bainbridge MN, Wang M, Wu Y, Newsham I, Muzny DM, Jefferies JL, et al. Targeted enrichment beyond the consensus coding DNA sequence exome reveals exons with higher variant densities. Genome Biol 2011;12:R68. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-7-r68
  48. Gilissen C, Hehir-Kwa JY, Thung DT, van de Vorst M, van Bon BW, Willemsen MH, et al. Genome sequencing identifies major causes of severe intellectual disability. Nature 2014;511:344-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13394
  49. Lupski JR, Reid JG, Gonzaga-Jauregui C, Rio Deiros D, Chen DC, Nazareth L, et al. Whole-genome sequencing in a patient with Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1181-91. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0908094
  50. Meynert AM, Ansari M, FitzPatrick DR, Taylor MS. Variant detection sensitivity and biases in whole genome and exome sequencing. BMC Bioinformatics 2014;15:247. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-15-247
  51. Pang AW, Macdonald JR, Yuen RK, Hayes VM, Scherer SW. Performance of high-throughput sequencing for the discovery of genetic variation across the complete size spectrum. G3 (Bethesda) 2014;4:63-5. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.113.008797
  52. Jiang YH, Yuen RK, Jin X, Wang M, Chen N, Wu X, et al. Detection of clinically relevant genetic variants in autism spectrum disorder by wholegenome sequencing. Am J Hum Genet 2013;93:249-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.06.012
  53. Glockle N, Kohl S, Mohr J, Scheurenbrand T, Sprecher A, Weisschuh N, et al. Panel-based next generation sequencing as a reliable and efficient technique to detect mutations in unselected patients with retinal dystrophies. Eur J Hum Genet 2014;22:99-104. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2013.72
  54. Wei Q, Zhu H, Qian X, Chen Z, Yao J, Lu Y, et al. Targeted genomic capture and massively parallel sequencing to identify novel variants causing Chinese hereditary hearing loss. J Transl Med 2014;12:311. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-014-0311-1
  55. Zhao L, Wang F, Wang H, Li Y, Alexander S, Wang K, et al. Next-generation sequencing-based molecular diagnosis of 82 retinitis pigmentosa probands from Northern Ireland. Hum Genet 2015;134:217-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-014-1512-7
  56. Lionel AC, Costain G, Monfared N, Walker S, Reuter MS, Hosseini SM, et al. Improved diagnostic yield compared with targeted gene sequencing panels suggests a role for whole-genome sequencing as a first-tier genetic test. Genet Med 2018;20:435-43. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2017.119
  57. Flore LA, Milunsky JM, editors. Updates in the genetic evaluation of the child with global developmental delay or intellectual disability. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2012;19:173-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spen.2012.09.004
  58. Foo JN, Liu JJ, Tan EK. Whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing in neurological diseases. Nat Rev Neurol 2012;8:508-17. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2012.148
  59. Green ED, Guyer MS. Charting a course for genomic medicine from base pairs to bedside. Nature 2011;470:204-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09764
  60. Huang Y, Yu S, Wu Z, Tang B. Genetics of hereditary neurological disorders in children. Transl Pediatr 2014;3:108-19.
  61. Bras J, Guerreiro R, Hardy J. Use of next-generation sequencing and other whole-genome strategies to dissect neurological disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 2012;13:453-64. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3271
  62. Wetterstrand KA. DNA sequencing costs: data [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Human Genome Research Institute, 2013 [cited 2010 Mar 1]. Available from: https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/DNA-Sequencing-Costs-Data.
  63. McGinn S, Gut IG. DNA sequencing - spanning the generations. N Biotechnol 2013;30:366-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2012.11.012
  64. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Xia F, Niu Z, Person R, Ding Y, et al. Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. JAMA 2014;312:1870-9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.14601
  65. Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, Nusbaum C, Zody MC, Baldwin J, et al. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 2001;409:860-921. https://doi.org/10.1038/35057062
  66. Jarvik GP, Amendola LM, Berg JS, Brothers K, Clayton EW, Chung W, et al. Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. Am J Hum Genet 2014;94:818-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.04.009
  67. Townsend A, Adam S, Birch PH, Lohn Z, Rousseau F, Friedman JM. "I want to know what's in Pandora's Box": comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing. Am J Med Genet A 2012;158a:2519-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.35554
  68. Amendola LM, Dorschner MO, Robertson PD, Salama JS, Hart R, Shirts BH, et al. Actionable exomic incidental findings in 6503 participants: challenges of variant classification. Genome Res 2015;25:305-15. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.183483.114
  69. Tabor HK, Auer PL, Jamal SM, Chong JX, Yu JH, Gordon AS, et al. Pathogenic variants for Mendelian and complex traits in exomes of 6,517 European and African Americans: implications for the return of incidental results. Am J Hum Genet 2014;95:183-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.07.006
  70. Robinson PN, Krawitz P, Mundlos S. Strategies for exome and genome sequence data analysis in disease-gene discovery projects. Clin Genet 2011;80:127-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2011.01713.x
  71. Taylor JC, Martin HC, Lise S, Broxholme J, Cazier JB, Rimmer A, et al. Factors influencing success of clinical genome sequencing across a broad spectrum of disorders. Nat Genet 2015;47:717-26. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3304
  72. Smith HS, Swint JM, Lalani SR, Yamal JM, de Oliveira Otto MC, Castellanos S, et al. Clinical application of genome and exome sequencing as a diagnostic tool for pediatric patients: a scoping review of the literature. Genet Med 2019;21:3-16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-018-0024-6
  73. Hamdan FF, Srour M, Capo-Chichi JM, Daoud H, Nassif C, Patry L, et al. De novo mutations in moderate or severe intellectual disability. PLoS Genetics 2014;10:e1004772. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004772
  74. Musante L, Ropers HH. Genetics of recessive cognitive disorders. Trends Genet 2014;30:32-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2013.09.008
  75. Yang Z, Thomas DC. Two-stage family-based designs for sequencing studies. BMC Proc 2014;8:S32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-8-S1-S32
  76. Ewans LJ, Schofield D, Shrestha R, Zhu Y, Gayevskiy V, Ying K, et al. Whole-exome sequencing reanalysis at 12 months boosts diagnosis and is cost-effective when applied early in Mendelian disorders. Genet Med 2018;20:1564-74. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2018.39
  77. Smith ED, Radtke K, Rossi M, Shinde DN, Darabi S, El-Khechen D, et al. Classification of genes: standardized clinical validity assessment of genedisease associations aids diagnostic exome analysis and reclassifications. Hum Mutat 2017;38:600-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.23183
  78. Mandl KD, Kohane IS. Time for a patient-driven health information economy? N Engl J Med 2016;374:205-8. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1512142
  79. Vissers LE, Gilissen C, Veltman JA. Genetic studies in intellectual disability and related disorders. Nat Rev Genet 2016;17:9-18. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3999
  80. Hayeems RZ, Babul-Hirji R, Hoang N, Weksberg R, Shuman C. Parents' experience with pediatric microarray: transferrable lessons in the era of genomic counseling. J Genet Couns 2016;25:298-304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-015-9871-3
  81. Amberger JS, Bocchini CA, Schiettecatte F, Scott AF, Hamosh A. OMIM. org: Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man ($OMIM^{(R)}$), an online catalog of human genes and genetic disorders. Nucleic Acids Res 2015; 43(Database issue):D789-98. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1205
  82. McKusick VA. Mendelian Inheritance in Man and its online version, OMIM. Am J Hum Genet 2007;80:588-604. https://doi.org/10.1086/514346
  83. Han JY, Jang W, Park J, Kim M, Kim Y, Lee IG. Diagnostic approach with genetic tests for global developmental delay and/or intellectual disability: Single tertiary center experience. Ann Hum Genet 2019;83:115-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ahg.12294
  84. Flore LA, Milunsky JM. Updates in the genetic evaluation of the child with global developmental delay or intellectual disability. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2012;19:173-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spen.2012.09.004
  85. Michelson DJ, Shevell MI, Sherr EH, Moeschler JB, Gropman AL, Ashwal S. Evidence report: Genetic and metabolic testing on children with global developmental delay: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. Neurology 2011;77:1629-35. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182345896
  86. Pekeles H, Accogli A, Boudrahem-Addour N, Russell L, Parente F, Srour M. Diagnostic yield of intellectual disability gene panels. Pediatr Neurol 2019;92:32-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2018.11.005
  87. Bowling KM, Thompson ML, Amaral MD, Finnila CR, Hiatt SM, Engel KL, et al. Genomic diagnosis for children with intellectual disability and/or developmental delay. Genome Med 2017;9:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-017-0433-1
  88. Gieldon L, Mackenroth L, Kahlert AK, Lemke JR, Porrmann J, Schallner J, et al. Diagnostic value of partial exome sequencing in developmental disorders. PLoS One 2018;13:e0201041. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201041
  89. Han JY, Jang JH, Park J, Lee IG. Targeted next-generation sequencing of Korean patients with developmental delay and/or intellectual disability. Front Pediatr 2018;6:391. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2018.00391
  90. Reid ES, Papandreou A, Drury S, Boustred C, Yue WW, Wedatilake Y, et al. Advantages and pitfalls of an extended gene panel for investigating complex neurometabolic phenotypes. Brain 2016;139:2844-54. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/aww221
  91. Brett M, McPherson J, Zang ZJ, Lai A, Tan ES, Ng I, et al. Massively parallel sequencing of patients with intellectual disability, congenital anomalies and/or autism spectrum disorders with a targeted gene panel. PLoS One 2014;9:e93409. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093409
  92. Kuperberg M, Lev D, Blumkin L, Zerem A, Ginsberg M, Linder I, et al. Utility of whole exome sequencing for genetic diagnosis of previously undiagnosed pediatric neurology patients. J Child Neurol 2016;31:1534-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073816664836
  93. Srivastava S, Cohen JS, Vernon H, Baranano K, McClellan R, Jamal L, et al. Clinical whole exome sequencing in child neurology practice. Ann Neurol 2014;76:473-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24251
  94. Grozeva D, Carss K, Spasic-Boskovic O, Tejada MI, Gecz J, Shaw M, et al. Targeted next-generation sequencing analysis of 1,000 individuals with intellectual disability. Hum Mutat 2015;36:1197-204. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.22901

Cited by

  1. Parallel Tests of Whole Exome Sequencing and Copy Number Variant Sequencing Increase the Diagnosis Yields of Rare Pediatric Disorders vol.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.00473
  2. Next-generation sequencing is a powerful method to enhance diagnostic yield in global developmental delay/intellectual disability vol.63, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3345/cep.2019.01683
  3. Detection of Disease-Causing SNVs/Indels and CNVs in Single Test Based on Whole Exome Sequencing: A Retrospective Case Study in Epileptic Encephalopathies vol.9, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.635703
  4. Comorbidities associated with genetic abnormalities in children with intellectual disability vol.11, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86131-3
  5. Identification of a novel KAT6A variant in an infant presenting with facial dysmorphism and developmental delay: a case report and literature review vol.14, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12920-021-01148-x
  6. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis in Hereditary Hearing Impairment vol.11, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122395