Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38944749›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2024

Considerations for reporting variants in novel candidate genes identified during clinical genomic testing.

Jessica X Chong, Seth I Berger, Samantha Baxter, Erica Smith, Changrui Xiao, Daniel G Calame, Megan H Hawley, E Andres Rivera-Munoz, Stephanie DiTroia, Genomics Research to Elucidate the Genetics of Rare Diseases (GREGoR) Consortium and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Identification of biallelic loss-of-functionJournal of medical genetics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Collaborative Genomics for Dystonia in Central and Eastern Europe: Successes Achieved, New Frontiers Ahead.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jessica X ChongDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Genetic Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Brotman-Baty Institute for Precision Medicine, Seattle, WA. Electronic address: jxchong@uw.edu.
Seth I BergerCenter for Genetic Medicine Research, Children's National Research Institute, Washington, DC.
Samantha BaxterProgram in Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA.
Erica SmithDepartment of Clinical Diagnostics, Ambry Genetics, Aliso Viejo, CA.
Changrui XiaoDepartment of Neurology, University of California Irvine, Orange, CA.
Daniel G CalameDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Neurosciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
Megan H HawleyClinical Operations, Invitae, Iselin, NJ.
E Andres Rivera-MunozDepartment of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
Stephanie DiTroiaProgram in Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA.
Genomics Research to Elucidate the Genetics of Rare Diseases (GREGoR) Consortium
Michael J BamshadDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Genetic Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Brotman-Baty Institute for Precision Medicine, Seattle, WA; Department of Pediatrics, Division of Genetic Medicine, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA.
Heidi L RehmProgram in Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA; Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.

Funding

Stanford Mendelian Genomics Research CenterU01HG011762 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jonathan Adam Bernstein, Stephen Montgomery · 2021 to 2026
$16.7M
University of Washington Mendelian Genomics Research Center (UW-MGRC)U01HG011744 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MICHAEL Joseph BAMSHAD, Evan Eichler · 2021 to 2026
$15.8M
University of Washington (UW) Mendelian Genomics Data Coordinating CenterU24HG011746 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Susanne May, ALI SHOJAIE · 2021 to 2026
$14.8M
Broad Institute Mendelian Genomic Research CenterU01HG011755 · NHGRI · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI Anne O'Donnell-Luria, MICHAEL E TALKOWSKI · 2021 to 2026
$14.6M
Frequency of variants of unknown significance by ancestry groups in the All of Us Research Program cohortU01HG011758 · NHGRI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI RICHARD A GIBBS, JAMES R. LUPSKI · 2021 to 2026
$13.8M
Pediatric Mendelian Genomics Research CenterU01HG011745 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI Eric J. Vilain · 2021 to 2026
$13.3M
Center for Undiagnosed Diseases at StanfordU01NS134358 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jonathan Adam Bernstein, HOLLY K TABOR · 2023 to 2026
$3.1M
NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011744NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011745NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011755NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011758NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011762NHGRI NIH HHS U24 HG011746NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS134358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the first novel gene discovery for a Mendelian condition was made via exome sequencing, the rapid increase in the number of genes known to underlie Mendelian conditions coupled with the adoption of exome (and more recently, genome) sequencing by diagnostic testing labs has changed the landscape of genomic testing for rare diseases. Specifically, many individuals suspected to have a Mendelian condition are now routinely offered clinical ES. This commonly results in a precise genetic diagnosis but frequently overlooks the identification of novel candidate genes. Such candidates are also less likely to be identified in the absence of large-scale gene discovery research programs. Accordingly, clinical laboratories have both the opportunity, and some might argue a responsibility, to contribute to novel gene discovery, which should, in turn, increase the diagnostic yield for many conditions. However, clinical diagnostic laboratories must necessarily balance priorities for throughput, turnaround time, cost efficiency, clinician preferences, and regulatory constraints and often do not have the infrastructure or resources to effectively participate in either clinical translational or basic genome science research efforts. For these and other reasons, many laboratories have historically refrained from broadly sharing potentially pathogenic variants in novel genes via networks such as Matchmaker Exchange, much less reporting such results to ordering providers. Efforts to report such results are further complicated by a lack of guidelines for clinical reporting and interpretation of variants in novel candidate genes. Nevertheless, there are myriad benefits for many stakeholders, including patients/families, clinicians, and researchers, if clinical laboratories systematically and routinely identify, share, and report novel candidate genes. To facilitate this change in practice, we developed criteria for triaging, sharing, and reporting novel candidate genes that are most likely to be promptly validated as underlying a Mendelian condition and translated to use in clinical settings.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingGenomicsExomeExome SequencingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic VariationGenome, HumanHumansCandidate geneDiagnosticsGene discoveryMendelian disorderRare disease

Identifiers

PMID38944749
PMCPMC11456385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.