Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30531895›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2019

Analysis of 51 proposed hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genes from genome sequencing data in sarcomere negative cases has negligible diagnostic yield.

Kate L Thomson, Elizabeth Ormondroyd, Andrew R Harper, Tim Dent, Karen McGuire, John Baksi, Edward Blair, Paul Brennan, Rachel Buchan, Teofila Bueser and 19 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Genetics of Sudden Cardiac Death.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Dilated Cardiomyopathy: A Genetic Journey from Past to Future.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Age and Sex Differences in the Genetics of Cardiomyopathy.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)/Heart Rhythm Society (HRS)/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS)/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS) Expert Consensus Statement on the state of genetic testing for cardiac diseases.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors at 12 institutions in 2 countries.

Kate L ThomsonDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Elizabeth OrmondroydDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Andrew R HarperDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tim DentDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Karen McGuireOxford Medical Genetics Laboratories, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
John BaksiNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Edward BlairOxford Centre for Genomic Medicine, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Paul BrennanNorthern Genetics Service, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Rachel BuchanNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Teofila BueserKing's College London, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Carolyn CampbellDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gerald Carr-WhiteGuy's & St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Stuart CookNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Matthew DanielsDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sri V V DeeviDepartment of Haematology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Judith GoodshipNorthern Genetics Service, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Jesse B G HayesmooreOxford Medical Genetics Laboratories, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Alex HendersonNorthern Genetics Service, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Teresa LambOxford Medical Genetics Laboratories, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Sanjay PrasadNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paula Rayner-MatthewsDepartment of Haematology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Leema RobertGuy's & St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Linda SneddonNorthern Genetics Service, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Hannah StarkDepartment of Haematology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Roddy WalshNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
James S WareNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Martin FarrallDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Hugh C WatkinsDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. hugh.watkins@rdm.ox.ac.uk.
NIHR BioResource – Rare Diseases Consortium
University of Oxford · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBHarefield Hospital · GBImperial College London · GBMRC London Institute of Medical Sciences · GBCentre for Human Genetics · GBChurchill Hospital · GBKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation RE/13/1/30181British Heart Foundation RG/12/16/29939British Heart Foundation RG/18/9/33887British Heart Foundation SP/10/10/28431Department of Health NIHR-HCS-D13-04-006Department of Health RG65966Medical Research Council MC_U120085815Medical Research Council MC_UP_1102/20Wellcome Trust 090532/Z/09/ZWellcome Trust 098519Wellcome Trust 107469
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIncreasing numbers of genes are being implicated in Mendelian disorders and incorporated into clinical test panels. However, lack of evidence supporting the gene-disease relationship can hinder interpretation. We explored the utility of testing 51 additional genes for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), one of the most commonly tested Mendelian disorders.

methodsUsing genome sequencing data from 240 sarcomere gene negative HCM cases and 6229 controls, we undertook case-control and individual variant analyses to assess 51 genes that have been proposed for HCM testing.

resultsWe found no evidence to suggest that rare variants in these genes are prevalent causes of HCM. One variant, in a single case, was categorized as likely to be pathogenic. Over 99% of variants were classified as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) and 54% of cases had one or more VUS.

conclusionFor almost all genes, the gene-disease relationship could not be validated and lack of evidence precluded variant interpretation. Thus, the incremental diagnostic yield of extending testing was negligible, and would, we propose, be outweighed by problems that arise with a high rate of uninterpretable findings. These findings highlight the need for rigorous, evidence-based selection of genes for clinical test panels.

Indexed as

SarcomeresAdolescentAdultAgedCardiomyopathy, HypertrophicCase-Control StudiesFemaleGenetic Association StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedWhole Genome SequencingYoung Adultevidence-basedgenetic testingHCMvariant interpretationVUS

Identifiers

PMID30531895
PMCPMC6614037
OpenAlexW2905200761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.