RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparing the diagnostic and clinical utility of WGS and WES with standard genetic testing (SGT) in children with suspected genetic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.07.17.23292722
DO 10.1101/2023.07.17.23292722
A1 Tirrell, Kimberley M.B.
A1 O’Neill, Helen C.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/07/17/2023.07.17.23292722.abstract
AB Importance Rare genetic diseases are one of the leading causes of infant mortality worldwide. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-exome sequencing (WES) are relatively new techniques for diagnosing genetic diseases, that classic newborn screening (NBS) fails to detect.Objective To systematically assess the diagnostic and clinical utility of WGS and WES, compared to standard genetic testing (SGT), in children with suspected genetic diseases, and discuss its impact on the expansion of NBS.Data Sources EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and references of included full-text articles were searched until 21st October 2021.Study Selection Studies reporting the diagnostic yield or rate of change of management for WGS and/or WES were included. The meta-analysis included 43 of the original 1768 identified articles (2%).Data Extraction and Synthesis Data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. The quality of included papers was assessed using QUADAS-2, and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to create pooled proportions and a pooled odds ratio.Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s) Diagnostic utility, as determined by the diagnostic yield, which is defined as P/LP variants with strong or moderate associations with the presenting clinical phenotype of the affected patient, and that were reported to the patient’s clinician. Clinical utility as defined by any change in clinical management (medically or surgically), determined through clinician questionnaires or Electronic Health Record reviews.Results A total of 43 studies were included, comprising 6168 children. The pooled diagnostic utility of WES (0.40, 95% CI 0.34-0.45, I2=90%), was qualitatively greater than WGS (0.34, 95% CI 0.29-0.39, I2=79%), and SGT (0.19, 95% CI 0.13-0.25, I2=64%). The pooled clinical utility of WGS (0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.89, I2=93%), was qualitatively greater than WES (0.72, 95% CI 0.61-0.81, I2=86%), while both were qualitatively greater than SGT (0.69, 95% CI 0.38-0.94).Conclusions and Relevance Our evidence suggests that WGS/WES should be considered the first-line test for genetic diseases. There is reason to believe that WGS and WES should be included as part of NBS, however, more studies are required to assess the cost-effectiveness of this approach.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authorsACMGAmerican College of Medical GeneticsCMAChromosomal microarrayEHRElectronic Health RecordNBSNewborn screeningNGSNext-generation sequencingP/LPPathogenic/Likely PathogenicSGTStandard genetic testingVUSVariants of unknown significanceWGSWhole-genome sequencingWESWhole-exome sequencing