Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37889289›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2024

Reanalysis of whole-exome sequencing (WES) data of children with neurodevelopmental disorders in a standard patient care context.

Michelle van Slobbe, Arie van Haeringen, Lisenka E L M Vissers, Emilia K Bijlsma, Julie W Rutten, Manon Suerink, Esther A R Nibbeling, Claudia A L Ruivenkamp, Saskia Koene

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A De NovoInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  5. The role of reanalyses in genomic sequencing for fetal effusions.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Navigating an Uninformative Genomic Test Result: A Practical Guide.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michelle van SlobbeDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Arie van HaeringenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3786-6716
Lisenka E L M VissersDepartment of Human Genetics, Donders Centre for Neuroscience, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6470-5497
Emilia K BijlsmaDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2443-3906
Julie W RuttenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3250-7263
Manon SuerinkDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7058-6973
Esther A R NibbelingDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8818-3232
Claudia A L RuivenkampDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1450-4376
Saskia KoeneDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands. s.koene@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9876-744X
Leiden University · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

European Reference Network on Rare Congenital Malformations and Rare Intellectual Disability ERN-ITHACA. [EU Framework Partnership Agreement ID 3HP-HP-FPA ERN-01-2016/739516] 3HP-HP-FPA ERN-01-2016/739516European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation program 779257
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aims to inform future genetic reanalysis management by evaluating the yield of whole-exome sequencing (WES) reanalysis in standard patient care in the Netherlands. Single-center data of 159 patients with a neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD), in which WES analysis and reanalysis were performed between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2021, was retrospectively collected. Patients were included if they were under the age of 18 years at initial analysis and if this initial analysis did not result in a diagnosis. Demographic, phenotypic, and genotypic characteristics of patients were collected and analyzed. The primary outcomes of our study were (i) diagnostic yield at reanalysis, (ii) reasons for detecting a new possibly causal variant at reanalysis, (iii) unsolicited findings, and (iv) factors associated with positive result of reanalysis. In addition, we conducted a questionnaire study amongst the 7 genetic department in the Netherlands creating an overview of used techniques, yield, and organization of WES reanalysis. The single-center data show that in most cases, WES reanalysis was initiated by the clinical geneticist (65%) or treating physician (30%). The mean time between initial WES analysis and reanalysis was 3.7 years. A new (likely) pathogenic variant or VUS with a clear link to the phenotype was found in 20 initially negative cases, resulting in a diagnostic yield of 12.6%. In 75% of these patients, the diagnosis had clinical consequences, as for example, a screening plan for associated signs and symptoms could be devised. Most (32%) of the (likely) causal variants identified at WES reanalysis were discovered due to a newly described gene-disease association. In addition to the 12.6% diagnostic yield based on new diagnoses, reclassification of a variant of uncertain significance found at initial analysis led to a definite diagnosis in three patients. Diagnostic yield was higher in patients with dysmorphic features compared to patients without clear dysmorphic features (yield 27% vs. 6%; p = 0.001).

conclusionsOur results show that WES reanalysis in patients with NDD in standard patient care leads to a substantial increase in genetic diagnoses. In the majority of newly diagnosed patients, the diagnosis had clinical consequences. Knowledge about the clinical impact of WES reanalysis, clinical characteristics associated with higher yield, and the yield per year after a negative WES in larger clinical cohorts is warranted to inform guidelines for genetic reanalysis. These guidelines will be of great value for pediatricians, pediatric rehabilitation specialists, and pediatric neurologists in daily care of patients with NDD. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Whole exome sequencing can cost-effectively identify a genetic cause of intellectual disability in about 30-40% of patients. • WES reanalysis in a research setting can lead to a definitive diagnosis in 10-20% of previously exome negative cases. WHAT IS NEW: • WES reanalysis in standard patient care resulted in a diagnostic yield of 13% in previously exome negative children with NDD. • The presence of dysmorphic features is associated with an increased diagnostic yield of WES reanalysis.

Indexed as

ExomeIntellectual DisabilityAdolescentChildExome SequencingGenetic TestingHumansPhenotypeRetrospective StudiesDiagnosisIntellectual disabilityNeurodevelopmental disorderReanalysisWhole-exome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID37889289
PMCPMC10858114
OpenAlexW4387966869

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.