A custom-designed panel sequencing study in 201 Chinese patients with craniosynostosis revealed novel variants and distinct mutation spectra

The current understanding of germline predisposition in non-syndromic sagittal craniosynostosis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this literature review was to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the current understanding of the genetic etiology for non-syndromic sagittal craniosynostosis.

METHODS

Using the PubMed database and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we systematically reviewed relevant records on germline genetics in children with non-syndromic sagittal craniosynostosis.

RESULTS

Two hundred two records were identified, of which 25 were included following title and abstract screening and subsequent full-text review. The 25 records in combination included 829 children with non-syndromic sagittal craniosynostosis. A likely pathogenic or pathogenic germline variant was reported for 9.8% of the 827 patients for whom germline genetic testing was performed. The reported variants were distributed across 50 different genes, with more than one variant detected in 13 genes.

CONCLUSION

Based on the existing literature, genetic predisposition is likely to play a role in at least 9% of children with non-syndromic sagittal craniosynostosis. Future studies will benefit from international consensus in terms of diagnostic nomenclature and a higher level of standardization across study methodologies and bioinformatic approaches.

Review of Recurrently Mutated Genes in Craniosynostosis Supports Expansion of Diagnostic Gene Panels

Craniosynostosis, the premature fusion of the cranial sutures, affects ~1 in 2000 children. Although many patients with a genetically determined cause harbor a variant in one of just seven genes or have a chromosomal abnormality, over 60 genes are known to be recurrently mutated, thus comprising a long tail of rarer diagnoses. Genome sequencing for the diagnosis of rare diseases is increasingly used in clinical settings, but analysis of the data is labor intensive and involves a trade-off between achieving high sensitivity or high precision. PanelApp, a crowd-sourced disease-focused set of gene panels, was designed to enable prioritization of variants in known disease genes for a given pathology, allowing enhanced identification of true-positives. For heterogeneous disorders like craniosynostosis, these panels must be regularly updated to ensure that diagnoses are not being missed. We provide a systematic review of genetic literature on craniosynostosis over the last 5 years, including additional results from resequencing a 42-gene panel in 617 affected individuals. We identify 16 genes (representing a 25% uplift) that should be added to the list of bona fide craniosynostosis disease genes and discuss the insights that these new genes provide into pathophysiological mechanisms of craniosynostosis.

An additional whole-exome sequencing study in 102 panel-undiagnosed patients: A retrospective study in a Chinese craniosynostosis cohort

Craniosynostosis (CRS) is a disease with prematurely fused cranial sutures. In the last decade, the whole-exome sequencing (WES) was widely used in Caucasian populations. The WES largely contributed in genetic diagnosis and exploration on new genetic mechanisms of CRS. In this study, we enrolled 264 CRS patients in China. After a 17-gene-panel sequencing designed in the previous study, 139 patients were identified with pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants according to the ACMG guideline as positive genetic diagnosis. WES was then performed on 102 patients with negative genetic diagnosis by panel. Ten P/LP variants were additionally identified in ten patients, increasing the genetic diagnostic yield by 3.8% (10/264). The novel variants in ANKH, H1-4, EIF5A, SOX6, and ARID1B expanded the mutation spectra of CRS. Then we designed a compatible research pipeline (RP) for further exploration. The RP could detect all seven P/LP SNVs and InDels identified above, in addition to 15 candidate variants found in 13 patients with worthy of further study. In sum, the 17-gene panel and WES identified positive genetic diagnosis for 56.4% patients (149/264) in 16 genes. At last, in our estimation, the genetic testing strategy of “Panel-first” saves 24.3% of the cost compared with “WES only”, suggesting the “Panel-first” is an economical strategy.