Exome copy number variant detection, analysis and classification in a large cohort of families with undiagnosed rare genetic disease
Author:
Lemire GabrielleORCID, Sanchis-Juan Alba, Russell Kathryn, Baxter Samantha, Chao Katherine R., Singer-Berk Moriel, Groopman Emily, Wong Isaac, England Eleina, Goodrich Julia, Pais Lynn, Austin-Tse Christina, DiTroia Stephanie, O’Heir Emily, Ganesh Vijay S., Wojcik Monica H., Evangelista Emily, Snow Hana, Osei-Owusu Ikeoluwa, Fu Jack, Singh Mugdha, Mostovoy Yulia, Huang Steve, Garimella Kiran, Kirkham Samantha L., Neil Jennifer E., Shao Diane D., Walsh Christopher A., Argili Emanuela, Le Carolyn, Sherr Elliott H., Gleeson Joseph, Shril Shirlee, Schneider Ronen, Hildebrandt Friedhelm, Sankaran Vijay G., Madden Jill A., Genetti Casie A., Beggs Alan H., Agrawal Pankaj B., Bujakowska Kinga M., Place Emily, Pierce Eric A., Donkervoort Sandra, Bönnemann Carsten G., Gallacher Lyndon, Stark Zornitza, Tan Tiong, White Susan M., Töpf Ana, Straub Volker, Fleming Mark D., Pollak Martin R., Õunap Katrin, Pajusalu Sander, Donald Kirsten A., Bruwer Zandre, Ravenscroft Gianina, Laing Nigel G., MacArthur Daniel G., Rehm Heidi L., Talkowski Michael E., Brand Harrison, O’Donnell-Luria AnneORCID
Abstract
AbstractCopy number variants (CNVs) are significant contributors to the pathogenicity of rare genetic diseases and with new innovative methods can now reliably be identified from exome sequencing. Challenges still remain in accurate classification of CNV pathogenicity. CNV calling using GATK-gCNV was performed on exomes from a cohort of 6,633 families (15,759 individuals) with heterogeneous phenotypes and variable prior genetic testing collected at the Broad Institute Center for Mendelian Genomics of the GREGoR consortium. Each family’s CNV data was analyzed using theseqrplatform and candidate CNVs classified using the 2020 ACMG/ClinGen CNV interpretation standards. We developed additional evidence criteria to address situations not covered by the current standards. The addition of CNV calling to exome analysis identified causal CNVs for 173 families (2.6%). The estimated sizes of CNVs ranged from 293 bp to 80 Mb with estimates that 44% would not have been detected by standard chromosomal microarrays. The causal CNVs consisted of 141 deletions, 15 duplications, 4 suspected complex structural variants (SVs), 3 insertions and 10 complex SVs, the latter two groups being identified by orthogonal validation methods. We interpreted 153 CNVs as likely pathogenic/pathogenic and 20 CNVs as high interest variants of uncertain significance. Calling CNVs from existing exome data increases the diagnostic yield for individuals undiagnosed after standard testing approaches, providing a higher resolution alternative to arrays at a fraction of the cost of genome sequencing. Our improvements to the classification approach advances the systematic framework to assess the pathogenicity of CNVs.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
|
|