Inconsistencies between prenatal diagnostic and genetic testing laboratories on variant validation of rare monogenic diseases

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe advent of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) has enhanced the diagnostic efficacy for monogenic diseases, while presenting challenges in achieving consistent diagnoses.MethodWe retrospectively analyzed the concordance rate and reasons for the inconsistency between the original diagnostic result from the genetic testing laboratory and the variant validation result from the prenatal diagnostic center. The validation procedure comprised three stages: validation of variant detection, reevaluation of variant classification, and assessment of recurrence risk, which involved verifying the mode of inheritance and parental carriage.ResultIn total, 17 (6%) of the 286 families affected by rare monogenic diseases showed different results during the variant validation procedure. These cases comprised four (23.5%) with variant detection errors, 12 (70.5%) with inconsistent interpretation, and one (6%) with non‐Mendelian inheritance patterns. False‐positive NGS results confirmed by Sanger sequencing were related to pseudogenes and GC‐rich regions. The classification of the 17 variants was altered in the 12 cases owing to various factors. The case with an atypical inheritance pattern was originally considered autosomal recessive inheritance, but was diagnosed as maternal uniparental disomy after additional genetic analysis.ConclusionWe underscored the significance of variant validation by prenatal diagnostic centers. Families affected by monogenic diseases with reproductive plans should be referred to prenatal genetic centers as early as possible to avoid different results that may postpone subsequent prenatal diagnosis.