Copy Number Variant Detection with Low-Coverage Whole-Genome Sequencing Represents a Viable Alternative to the Conventional Array-CGH

Understanding genetic variability: exploring large-scale copy number variants through non-invasive prenatal testing in European populations

Large-scale copy number variants (CNVs) are structural alterations in the genome that involve the duplication or deletion of DNA segments, contributing to genetic diversity and playing a crucial role in the evolution and development of various diseases and disorders, as they can lead to the dosage imbalance of one or more genes. Massively parallel sequencing (MPS) has revolutionized the field of genetic analysis and contributed significantly to routine clinical diagnosis and screening. It offers a precise method for detecting CNVs with exceptional accuracy. In this context, a non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) based on the sequencing of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from pregnant women's plasma using a low-coverage whole genome MPS (WGS) approach represents a valuable source for population studies. Here, we analyzed genomic data of 12,732 pregnant women from the Slovak (9,230), Czech (1,583), and Hungarian (1,919) populations. We identified 5,062 CNVs ranging from 200 kbp and described their basic characteristics and differences between the subject populations. Our results suggest that re-analysis of sequencing data from routine WGS assays has the potential to obtain large-scale CNV population frequencies, which are not well known and may provide valuable information to support the classification and interpretation of this type of genetic variation. Furthermore, this could contribute to expanding knowledge about the central European genome without investing in additional laboratory work, as NIPTs are a relatively widely used screening method.

Identification of copy number variants with genome sequencing: Clinical experiences from the NYCKidSeq program

Copy number variations (CNVs) play a significant role in human disease. While chromosomal microarray has traditionally been the first-tier test for CNV detection, use of genome sequencing (GS) is increasing. We report the frequency of CNVs detected with GS in a diverse pediatric cohort from the NYCKidSeq program and highlight specific examples of its clinical impact. A total of 1052 children (0-21 years) with neurodevelopmental, cardiac, and/or immunodeficiency phenotypes received GS. Phenotype-driven analysis was used, resulting in 183 (17.4%) participants with a diagnostic result. CNVs accounted for 20.2% of participants with a diagnostic result (37/183) and ranged from 0.5 kb to 16 Mb. Of participants with a diagnostic result (n = 183) and phenotypes in more than one category, 5/17 (29.4%) were solved by a CNV finding, suggesting a high prevalence of diagnostic CNVs in participants with complex phenotypes. Thirteen participants with a diagnostic CNV (35.1%) had previously uninformative genetic testing, of which nine included a chromosomal microarray. This study demonstrates the benefits of GS for reliable detection of CNVs in a pediatric cohort with variable phenotypes.

An overview of mutational and copy number signatures in human cancer

The genome of each cell in the human body is constantly under assault from a plethora of exogenous and endogenous processes that can damage DNA. If not successfully repaired, DNA damage generally becomes permanently imprinted in cells, and all their progenies, as somatic mutations. In most cases, the patterns of these somatic mutations contain the tell‐tale signs of the mutagenic processes that have imprinted and are termed mutational signatures. Recent pan‐cancer genomic analyses have elucidated the compendium of mutational signatures for all types of small mutational events, including (1) single base substitutions, (2) doublet base substitutions, and (3) small insertions/deletions. In contrast to small mutational events, where, in most cases, DNA damage is a prerequisite, aneuploidy, which refers to the abnormal number of chromosomes in a cell, usually develops from mistakes during DNA replication. Such mistakes include DNA replication stress, mitotic errors caused by faulty microtubule dynamics, or cohesion defects that contribute to chromosomal breakage and can lead to copy number (CN) alterations (CNAs) or even to structural rearrangements. These aberrations also leave behind genomic scars which can be inferred from sequencing as CN signatures and rearrangement signatures. The analyses of mutational signatures of small mutational events have been extensively reviewed, so we will not comprehensively re‐examine them here. Rather, our focus will be on summarising the existing knowledge for mutational signatures of CNAs. As studying CN signatures is an emerging field, we briefly summarise the utility that mutational signatures of small mutational events have provided in basic science, cancer treatment, and cancer prevention, and we emphasise the future role that CN signatures may play in each of these fields. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

CNV Detection from Exome Sequencing Data in Routine Diagnostics of Rare Genetic Disorders: Opportunities and Limitations

To assess the potential of detecting copy number variations (CNVs) directly from exome sequencing (ES) data in diagnostic settings, we developed a CNV-detection pipeline based on ExomeDepth software and applied it to ES data of 450 individuals. Initially, only CNVs affecting genes in the requested diagnostic gene panels were scored and tested against arrayCGH results. Pathogenic CNVs were detected in 18 individuals. Most detected CNVs were larger than 400 kb (11/18), but three individuals had small CNVs impacting one or a few exons only and were thus not detectable by arrayCGH. Conversely, two pathogenic CNVs were initially missed, as they impacted genes not included in the original gene panel analysed, and a third one was missed as it was in a poorly covered region. The overall combined diagnostic rate (SNVs + CNVs) in our cohort was 36%, with wide differences between clinical domains. We conclude that (1) the ES-based CNV pipeline detects efficiently large and small pathogenic CNVs, (2) the detection of CNV relies on uniformity of sequencing and good coverage, and (3) in patients who remain unsolved by the gene panel analysis, CNV analysis should be extended to all captured genes, as diagnostically relevant CNVs may occur everywhere in the genome.