Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Short-read genome sequencing (GS) is a comprehensive genetic testing method capable of detecting multiple variant types. Despite its technical advantages, systemic comparisons of singleton GS (sGS), trio GS (tGS), and exome sequencing-based standard-of-care (SoC) in real-world diagnostics remain limited. Methods: We systematically compared sGS, tGS, and SoC genetic testing in 448 patients with rare diseases in a blinded, prospective study. Three independent teams evaluated the diagnostic yield, variant detection capabilities, and clinical feasibility of GS as a first-tier test. Diagnostic yield was assessed through both prospective and retrospective analyses. Results: In prospective analyses, tGS achieved the highest diagnostic yield for likely pathogenic/pathogenic variants (36.8%) in a newly trained team, outperforming the experienced SoC team (36.0%) and the sGS team (30.4%). Retrospective analyses, accounting for technical variant detection and team experience differences, reported diagnostic yields of 38.6% for SoC, 41.3% for sGS, and 42.2% for tGS. GS excelled in identifying deep intronic, non-coding, and small copy-number variants missed by SoC. Notably, tGS additionally identified three de novo variants classified as likely pathogenic based on recent GeneMatcher collaborations and newly published gene-disease association studies. Conclusion: GS, particularly tGS, demonstrated superior diagnostic performance, supporting its use as a first-tier genetic test. sGS offers a cost-effective alternative, enabling faster, more efficient diagnoses for rare disease patients.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by Illumina within the Beyond the Exome project.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was conducted in full compliance with the ethical standards set forth by the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Institute of Human Genetics, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, University of Kiel, Germany (Ethics Approval Number: [D 621/21]). All participants and/or their legal guardians provided written informed consent prior to inclusion in the study. Confidentiality and privacy of all participants were rigorously maintained, with data anonymized to protect personal information.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
