ArticleHuman mutation2025
Genome Sequencing of Rare Disease Patients Through the Korean Regional Rare Disease Diagnostic Support Program.
Article in Human mutation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AlphaGenome Atlas:medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- The importance and clinical utility of reanalysis of exome and genome sequencing data.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Expanding genetic and clinical spectra of β-tubulinopathies: A Korean study.Journal of human genetics · 2026Article
- Clinical utility of genome sequencing in rare diseases: lessons from a single-center study of 1,452 Korean families.NPJ genomic medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Affecting fewer than 20,000 people as defined in South Korea, rare diseases pose significant diagnostic challenges due to their diverse manifestations and genetic heterogeneity. Genome sequencing (GS) offers a promising solution by enabling simultaneous screening for thousands of rare genetic disorders. This study explores the diagnostic utility and necessity of GS within the government-funded Korean Regional Rare Disease Diagnostic Support Program (KR-RDSP), a collaborative initiative involving 11 regional rare disease centers across Korea. The program was launched as a proof-of-concept study in 2023 to equip the genetic clinics with a diagnostic tool to expedite the diagnoses for rare disease patients who reside outside the urban Seoul region where diagnostic resources are limited. The study leveraged GS to diagnose a cohort of 400 patients exhibiting a wide spectrum of symptoms. The overall diagnostic yield was 36.3% (145/400), with 4.8% (7/145) of the diagnosed patients being reported with variants that could not have been identified by chromosomal microarray or exome sequencing (ES), highlighting the added value of comprehensive genomic analysis. The implementation of a centralized GS analysis system streamlined the diagnostic process, enabling timely reporting within a reasonable turnaround time of ≤ 35 days. Segregation analysis by Sanger sequencing played a crucial role in confirming or reclassifying variant pathogenicity by elucidating inheritance patterns. Here, we summarize diagnostic statistics from the 400 GS dataset gathered from June 2023 to December 2023 and show interesting and informative case examples that illustrate the diagnostic efficacy of GS, highlighting its ability to uncover elusive genetic etiologies and provide personalized treatment insights. The study also highlights the successful implementation of the program for the 11 regional rare disease centers across Korea with a practical workflow, comprehensive testing, comparable diagnostic yield to previous reports, and, most importantly, reasonable turnaround time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.