Display options
Share it on

J Med Genet. 2016 Nov;53(11):761-767. doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2016-103837. Epub 2016 May 11.

Molecular findings from 537 individuals with inherited retinal disease.

Journal of medical genetics

Jamie M Ellingford, Stephanie Barton, Sanjeev Bhaskar, James O'Sullivan, Simon G Williams, Janine A Lamb, Binay Panda, Panagiotis I Sergouniotis, Rachel L Gillespie, Stephen P Daiger, Georgina Hall, Theodora Gale, I Christopher Lloyd, Paul N Bishop, Simon C Ramsden, Graeme C M Black

Affiliations

  1. Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK.
  2. Institute of Human Development, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
  3. Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
  4. Ganit Labs, Bio-IT Centre, Institute of Bioinformatics and Applied Biotechnology, Bangalore, India.
  5. Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
  6. School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas, USA.

PMID: 27208204 PMCID: PMC5106339 DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2016-103837

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a clinically and genetically heterogeneous set of disorders, for which diagnostic second-generation sequencing (next-generation sequencing, NGS) services have been developed worldwide.

METHODS: We present the molecular findings of 537 individuals referred to a 105-gene diagnostic NGS test for IRDs. We assess the diagnostic yield, the spectrum of clinical referrals, the variant analysis burden and the genetic heterogeneity of IRD. We retrospectively analyse disease-causing variants, including an assessment of variant frequency in Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC).

RESULTS: Individuals were referred from 10 clinically distinct classifications of IRD. Of the 4542 variants clinically analysed, we have reported 402 mutations as a cause or a potential cause of disease in 62 of the 105 genes surveyed. These variants account or likely account for the clinical diagnosis of IRD in 51% of the 537 referred individuals. 144 potentially disease-causing mutations were identified as novel at the time of clinical analysis, and we further demonstrate the segregation of known disease-causing variants among individuals with IRD. We show that clinically analysed variants indicated as rare in dbSNP and the Exome Variant Server remain rare in ExAC, and that genes discovered as a cause of IRD in the post-NGS era are rare causes of IRD in a population of clinically surveyed individuals.

CONCLUSIONS: Our findings illustrate the continued powerful utility of custom-gene panel diagnostic NGS tests for IRD in the clinic, but suggest clear future avenues for increasing diagnostic yields.

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Keywords: Molecular genetics; bioinformatics; inherited retinal dystrophy; next-generation sequencing; retinitis pigmentosa

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

  1. Ophthalmology. 2014 Nov;121(11):2124-37.e1-2 - PubMed
  2. J Med Genet. 2012 May;49(5):322-6 - PubMed
  3. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015 Jun;56(6):3642-55 - PubMed
  4. Nat Genet. 2015 Nov;47(11):1363-9 - PubMed
  5. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2014 Sep;2(5):393-401 - PubMed
  6. Hum Genet. 2014 Jan;133(1):1-9 - PubMed
  7. Nat Rev Genet. 2010 Jan;11(1):31-46 - PubMed
  8. Nat Protoc. 2015 Dec;10(12):2004-15 - PubMed
  9. Ophthalmology. 2016 Jan;123(1):9-18 - PubMed
  10. Genome Res. 2010 Sep;20(9):1297-303 - PubMed
  11. PLoS One. 2013 Nov 12;8(11):e78496 - PubMed
  12. J Clin Invest. 2010 Sep;120(9):3042-53 - PubMed
  13. JAMA. 2014 Nov 12;312(18):1870-9 - PubMed
  14. Lancet. 2015 May 9;385(9980):1916 - PubMed
  15. Nat Methods. 2010 Apr;7(4):248-9 - PubMed
  16. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Mar;24(3):459-62 - PubMed
  17. Nat Rev Genet. 2010 Apr;11(4):273-84 - PubMed
  18. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013 Sep 19;54(9):6255-61 - PubMed
  19. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 07;9(2):e88410 - PubMed
  20. Nat Genet. 2011 May;43(5):491-8 - PubMed
  21. Bioinformatics. 2009 Nov 1;25(21):2865-71 - PubMed
  22. Genet Med. 2015 May;17(5):405-24 - PubMed
  23. Ophthalmology. 2016 May;123(5):1143-50 - PubMed
  24. Nat Genet. 1996 Dec;14(4):461-4 - PubMed
  25. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 Sep;93(9):1151-4 - PubMed
  26. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015 Aug;160(2):354-363.e9 - PubMed
  27. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Apr;44(4):1458-63 - PubMed
  28. Bioinformatics. 2012 Nov 1;28(21):2747-54 - PubMed
  29. Nat Protoc. 2009;4(7):1073-81 - PubMed
  30. JAMA. 2014 Nov 12;312(18):1880-7 - PubMed
  31. Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60 - PubMed
  32. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2010 Sep;29(5):335-75 - PubMed
  33. Hum Genet. 2015 Feb;134(2):217-30 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support