Key Points
-
Clinical molecular genetic testing is transforming personalized medicine and is appropriate for a range of applications, such as rare disease diagnostics and predictive testing for common disorders.
-
Whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing may become a first-line clinical test for some naive diagnostic cases, but classic genetic tests will continue to be used for the high analytical sensitivity of specific defects and for the confirmation of genome findings.
-
There remains no single test to detect the wide array of genetic defects that may be inherited or arise de novo; clinical diagnostics requires multiple approaches to determine a causal genetic defect.
-
Although genome sequencing may transform diagnostic approaches in large academic medical centres, access to expensive and sophisticated tests are not universal. Genetic testing must be available globally through validated simple technologies for molecular diagnostics (such as direct PCR, linkage analysis or multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification).
-
The greatest challenge to clinical genomics is the reliable interpretation of the multiple and novel variants found through genome sequencing. Pathogenicity of genetic variants can be examined with bioinformatics prediction approaches, protein stability studies, transcriptional activity studies and allele- and/or gene-specific animal models.
-
As broader genomic information becomes available to providers and patients, partnerships will develop to convey patient-centred data, including incidental findings. The regulatory environment must adapt to the coming volume of genomic information to maximize benefit to patients and health-care systems and to match the expectations of the patient population with regard to these technologies.
Abstract
Genomic technologies are reaching the point of being able to detect genetic variation in patients at high accuracy and reduced cost, offering the promise of fundamentally altering medicine. Still, although scientists and policy advisers grapple with how to interpret and how to handle the onslaught and ambiguity of genome-wide data, established and well-validated molecular technologies continue to have an important role, especially in regions of the world that have more limited access to next-generation sequencing capabilities. Here we review the range of methods currently available in a clinical setting as well as emerging approaches in clinical molecular diagnostics. In parallel, we outline implementation challenges that will be necessary to address to ensure the future of genetic medicine.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pasche, B. & Absher, D. Whole-genome sequencing: a step closer to personalized medicine. JAMA 305, 1596–1597 (2011).
Green, E. D. & Guyer, M. S. Charting a course for genomic medicine from base pairs to bedside. Nature 470, 204–213 (2011).
Bainbridge, M. N. et al. Whole-genome sequencing for optimized patient management. Sci. Transl. Med. 3, 87re3 (2011).
Berg, J. S. et al. Next generation massively parallel sequencing of targeted exomes to identify genetic mutations in primary ciliary dyskinesia: implications for application to clinical testing. Genet. Med. 13, 218–229 (2011).
Choi, M. et al. Genetic diagnosis by whole exome capture and massively parallel DNA sequencing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 19096–19101 (2009).
Lupski, J. R. et al. Whole-genome sequencing in a patient with Charcot–Marie–Tooth neuropathy. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 1181–1191 (2010).
Maxmen, A. Exome sequencing deciphers rare diseases. Cell 144, 635–637 (2011).
Ng, S. B. et al. Exome sequencing identifies the cause of a Mendelian disorder. Nature Genet. 42, 30–35 (2010).
Rios, J., Stein, E., Shendure, J., Hobbs, H. H. & Cohen, J. C. Identification by whole-genome resequencing of gene defect responsible for severe hypercholesterolemia. Hum. Mol. Genet. 19, 4313–4318 (2010).
Roach, J. C. et al. Analysis of genetic inheritance in a family quartet by whole-genome sequencing. Science 328, 636–639 (2010).
Worthey, E. A. et al. Making a definitive diagnosis: successful clinical application of whole exome sequencing in a child with intractable inflammatory bowel disease. Genet. Med. 13, 255–262 (2010).
Mestan, K. K., Ilkhanoff, L., Mouli, S. & Lin, S. Genomic sequencing in clinical trials. J. Transl. Med. 9, 222 (2011).
Quail, M. A. et al. A tale of three next generation sequencing platforms: comparison of Ion Torrent, Pacific Biosciences and Illumina MiSeq sequencers. BMC Genomics 13, 341 (2012).
Liu, L. et al. Comparison of next-generation sequencing systems. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 251364 (2012).
de Jong, A., Dondorp, W. J., Frints, S. G., de Die-Smulders, C. E. & de Wert, G. M. Advances in prenatal screening: the ethical dimension. Nature Rev. Genet. 12, 657–663 (2011). This Review covers prenatal screening strategies from ultrasound scans to genome-wide molecular tests and considers the important ethical questions concerning reproductive choice, autonomy rights of future children, equity of access and the proportionality of testing.
Phimister, E. G., Feero, W. G. & Guttmacher, A. E. Realizing genomic medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 757–759 (2012).
Sequeiros, J. et al. The wide variation of definitions of genetic testing in international recommendations, guidelines and reports. J. Commun. Genet. 3, 113–124 (2012).
Kiezun, A. et al. Exome sequencing and the genetic basis of complex traits. Nature Genet. 44, 623–630 (2012).
Kitzman, J. O. et al. Noninvasive whole-genome sequencing of a human fetus. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 137ra76 (2012).
Lipman, P. J. et al. On the analysis of sequence data: testing for disease susceptibility loci using patterns of linkage disequilibrium. Genet. Epidemiol. 35, 880–886 (2011).
Massaro, J. D. et al. Analysis of five polymorphic DNA markers for indirect genetic diagnosis of haemophilia A in the Brazilian population. Haemophilia 17, e936–943 (2011).
Michaelides, M. et al. ABCA4 mutations and discordant ABCA4 alleles in patients and siblings with bull's-eye maculopathy. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 91, 1650–1655 (2007).
Pereira Fdos, S. et al. Mutations, clinical findings and survival estimates in South American patients with X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy. PLoS ONE 7, e34195 (2012).
Phylipsen, M. et al. Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis of β-thalassemia and sickle-cell disease using pyrophosphorolysis-activated polymerization and melting curve analysis. Prenat. Diagn. 32, 578–587 (2012).
Kearns, W. G. et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Semin. Reprod. Med. 23, 336–347 (2005). This paper reviews the scope of PGD to identify genetic abnormalities prior to embryo transfer and the techniques used for single cell detection of genetic variants.
Laurie, A. D. et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hemophilia A using indirect linkage analysis and direct genotyping approaches. J. Thromb. Haemost. 8, 783–789 (2010).
Wallace, A. J. Detection of unstable trinucleotide repeats. Methods Mol. Med. 5, 37–62 (1996).
Bakker, E. Is the DNA sequence the gold standard in genetic testing? Quality of molecular genetic tests assessed. Clin. Chem. 52, 557–558 (2006).
Murphy, K. M., Berg, K. D. & Eshleman, J. R. Sequencing of genomic DNA by combined amplification and cycle sequencing reaction. Clin. Chem. 51, 35–39 (2005).
SenGupta, D. J. & Cookson, B. T. SeqSharp: A general approach for improving cycle-sequencing that facilitates a robust one-step combined amplification and sequencing method. J. Mol. Diagn. 12, 272–277 (2010).
Robin, N. H., Falk, M. J. & Haldeman-Englert, C. R. FGFR-related craniosynostosis syndromes. GeneReviews [online], (updated 7 Jun 2011).
Katsanis, S. H. & Jabs, E. W. Treacher Collins syndrome. GeneReviews [online], (updated 30 Aug 2012).
Tartaglia, M., Gelb, B. D. & Zenker, M. Noonan syndrome and clinically related disorders. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 25, 161–179 (2011).
Hageman, G. S. et al. Clinical validation of a genetic model to estimate the risk of developing choroidal neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Hum. Genom. 5, 420–440 (2011).
Zanke, B., Hawken, S., Carter, R. & Chow, D. A genetic approach to stratification of risk for age-related macular degeneration. Can. J. Ophthalmol. 45, 22–27 (2010).
Schaaf, C. P., Wiszniewska, J. & Beaudet, A. L. Copy number and SNP arrays in clinical diagnostics. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 12, 25–51 (2011).
Meschia, J. F. et al. Genomic risk profiling of ischemic stroke: results of an international genome-wide association meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 6, e23161 (2011).
Tiu, R. V. et al. Prognostic impact of SNP array karyotyping in myelodysplastic syndromes and related myeloid malignancies. Blood 117, 4552–4560 (2011).
Imai, K., Kricka, L. J. & Fortina, P. Concordance study of 3 direct-to-consumer genetic-testing services. Clin. Chem. 57, 518–521 (2010).
Reid, R. J. et al. Association between health-service use and multiplex genetic testing. Genet. Med. 14, 852–859 (2012).
Haines, J. L. et al. Complement factor H variant increases the risk of age-related macular degeneration. Science 308, 419–421 (2005).
Klein, R. J. et al. Complement factor H polymorphism in age-related macular degeneration. Science 308, 385–389 (2005).
Edwards, A. O. et al. Complement factor H polymorphism and age-related macular degeneration. Science 308, 421–424 (2005).
Hageman, G. S. et al. A common haplotype in the complement regulatory gene factor H (HF1/CFH) predisposes individuals to age-related macular degeneration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 7227–7232 (2005).
Gold, B. et al. Variation in factor B (BF) and complement component 2 (C2) genes is associated with age-related macular degeneration. Nature Genet. 38, 458–462 (2006).
Despriet, D. D. et al. Complement factor H polymorphism, complement activators, and risk of age-related macular degeneration. JAMA 296, 301–309 (2006).
Tsuchiya, K. D. Fluorescence in situ hybridization. Clin. Lab. Med. 31, 525–542 (2011).
Raphael, B. Chapter 6: structural variation and medical genomics. PLoS Comput. Biol. 8, e1002821 (2012).
Fruhman, G. & Van den Veyver, I. B. Applications of array comparative genomic hybridization in obstetrics. Obstet. Gynecol. Clin. North Am. 37, 71–85 (2010).
Swaminathan, G. J. et al. DECIPHER: Web-based, community resource for clinical interpretation of rare variants in developmental disorders. Hum. Mol. Genet. 21, R37–R44 (2012).
Wapner, R. J. et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 2175–2184 (2012). This paper compares the accuracy, efficacy and yield of chromosomal microarray analysis to karyotyping as a primary diagnostic tool for the evaluation of developmental delay and structural malformations in children.
Kozlowski, P., Jasinska, A. J. & Kwiatkowski, D. J. New applications and developments in the use of multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Electrophoresis 29, 4627–4636 (2008). This paper describes the MLPA technique and explores its utility in copy number variation diagnostics.
Hills, A. et al. MLPA for confirmation of array CGH results and determination of inheritance. Mol. Cytogenet. 3, 19 (2010).
Talkowski, M. E. et al. Sequencing chromosomal abnormalities reveals neurodevelopmental loci that confer risk across diagnostic boundaries. Cell 149, 525–537 (2012).
Berg, J. S., Khoury, M. J. & Evans, J. P. Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genet. Med. (2011). To address the challenge of interpreting WGS data for personal use, this paper describes a 'binning' approach to reporting genomic variants.
Cooper, G. M. & Shendure, J. Needles in stacks of needles: finding disease-causal variants in a wealth of genomic data. Nature Rev. Genet. 12, 628–640 (2011). A Review of approaches is presented here for determining pathogenicity of single-nucleotide variants using comparative and in silico functional genomics.
Majewski, J., Schwartzentruber, J., Lalonde, E., Montpetit, A. & Jabado, N. What can exome sequencing do for you? J. Med. Genet. 48, 580–589 (2011).
Worthey, E. A. et al. Making a definitive diagnosis: successful clinical application of whole exome sequencing in a child with intractable inflammatory bowel disease. Genet. Med. 13, 255–262 (2011).
Need, A. C. et al. Clinical application of exome sequencing in undiagnosed genetic conditions. J. Med. Genet. 49, 353–361 (2012).
Mayer, A. N. et al. A timely arrival for genomic medicine. Genet. Med. 13, 195–196 (2010).
Drmanac, R. The advent of personal genome sequencing. Genet. Med. 13, 188–190 (2011).
Gonzaga-Jauregui, C., Lupski, J. R. & Gibbs, R. A. Human genome sequencing in health and disease. Annu. Rev. Med. 63, 35–61 (2012).
Rehm, H. L. Disease-targeted sequencing: a cornerstone in the clinic. Nature Rev. Genet. 14, 295–300 (2013).
Branton, D. et al. The potential and challenges of nanopore sequencing. Nature Biotech. 26, 1146–1153 (2008).
Skovgaard, O., Bak, M., Lobner-Olesen, A. & Tommerup, N. Genome-wide detection of chromosomal rearrangements, indels, and mutations in circular chromosomes by short read sequencing. Genome Res. 21, 1388–1393 (2011).
Smith, H. E. Identifying insertion mutations by whole-genome sequencing. Biotechniques 50, 96–97 (2011).
Metzker, M. L. Sequencing technologies — the next generation. Nature Rev. Genet. 11, 31–46 (2010). This is a technical Review of NGS technologies and recent advances in commercially available NGS instruments.
Hedges, D. J. et al. Comparison of three targeted enrichment strategies on the SOLiD sequencing platform. PLoS ONE 6, e18595 (2011).
Quail, M. et al. A tale of three next generation sequencing platforms: comparison of Ion Torrent, Pacific Biosciences and Illumina MiSeq sequencers. BMC Genomics 13, 341 (2012).
Sulonen, A. M. et al. Comparison of solution-based exome capture methods for next generation sequencing. Genome Biol. 12, R94 (2011).
Ashley, E. A. et al. Clinical assessment incorporating a personal genome. Lancet 375, 1525–1535 (2010).
Saunders, C. J. et al. Rapid whole-genome sequencing for genetic disease diagnosis in neonatal intensive care units. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 154ra135 (2012).
Rauch, A. et al. Range of genetic mutations associated with severe non-syndromic sporadic intellectual disability: an exome sequencing study. Lancet 380, 1674–1682 (2012).
de Ligt, J. et al. Diagnostic exome sequencing in persons with severe intellectual disability. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 1921–1929 (2012).
Roberts, N. J. et al. The predictive capacity of personal genome sequencing. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 133ra58 (2012).
Chen, R. et al. Personal omics profiling reveals dynamic molecular and medical phenotypes. Cell 148, 1293–1307 (2012).
Zuvich, R. L. et al. Pitfalls of merging GWAS data: lessons learned in the eMERGE network and quality control procedures to maintain high data quality. Genet. Epidemiol. 35, 887–898 (2011).
Pathak, J. et al. Evaluating phenotypic data elements for genetics and epidemiological research: experiences from the eMERGE and PhenX network projects. AMIA Summits Transl. Sci. Proc. 2011, 41–45 (2011).
McCarty, C. A. et al. The eMERGE network: a consortium of biorepositories linked to electronic medical records data for conducting genomic studies. BMC Med. Genom. 4, 13 (2011). This paper describes the eMERGE (Electronic Medical Records and Genomics) network and how it is exploring the utility of DNA repositories coupled with EMR systems.
Belmont, J. & McGuire, A. L. The futility of genomic counseling: essential role of electronic health records. Genome Med. 1, 48 (2009).
Richards, C. S. et al. ACMG recommendations for standards for interpretation and reporting of sequence variations: revisions 2007. Genet. Med. 10, 294–300 (2008). ACMG developed recommendations for standards for interpretation of sequence variations.
Stenson, P. D. et al. The Human Gene Mutation Database: 2008 update. Genome Med. 1, 13 (2009).
Bale, S. et al. MutaDATABASE: a centralized and standardized DNA variation database. Nature Biotech. 29, 117–118 (2011).
MacArthur, D. G. & Tyler-Smith, C. Loss-of-function variants in the genomes of healthy humans. Hum. Mol. Genet. 19, R125–R130 (2010).
MacArthur, D. G. et al. A systematic survey of loss-of-function variants in human protein-coding genes. Science 335, 823–828 (2012). This paper determined how many genetic variants predicted to cause loss of function of protein-coding genes humans carry.
Ng, S. B., Nickerson, D. A., Bamshad, M. J. & Shendure, J. Massively parallel sequencing and rare disease. Hum. Mol. Genet. 19, R119–R124 (2010).
Adzhubei, I. A. et al. A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations. Nature Methods 7, 248–249 (2010).
Kumar, P., Henikoff, S. & Ng, P. C. Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm. Nature Protoc. 4, 1073–1081 (2009).
Stone, E. A. & Sidow, A. Physicochemical constraint violation by missense substitutions mediates impairment of protein function and disease severity. Genome Res. 15, 978–986 (2005).
Amberger, J., Bocchini, C. & Hamosh, A. A new face and new challenges for Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM®). Hum. Mutat. 32, 564–567 (2011).
Robinson, P. N. et al. The Human Phenotype Ontology: a tool for annotating and analyzing human hereditary disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 83, 610–615 (2008).
Blake, J. A., Bult, C. J., Kadin, J. A., Richardson, J. E. & Eppig, J. T. The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): premier model organism resource for mammalian genomics and genetics. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, D842–D848 (2011).
Sprague, J. et al. The Zebrafish Information Network: the zebrafish model organism database. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, D581–D585 (2006).
Minoche, A. E., Dohm, J. C. & Himmelbauer, H. Evaluation of genomic high-throughput sequencing data generated on Illumina HiSeq and genome analyzer systems. Genome Biol. 12, R112 (2011).
Houdayer, C. et al. Evaluation of in silico splice tools for decision-making in molecular diagnosis. Hum. Mut. 29, 975–982 (2008).
Cartegni, L., Wang, J., Zhu, Z., Zhang, M. Q. & Krainer, A. R. ESEfinder: A web resource to identify exonic splicing enhancers. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 3568–3571 (2003).
Yandell, M. et al. A probabilistic disease-gene finder for personal genomes. Genome Res. 21, 1529–1542 (2011).
Pelak, K. et al. The characterization of twenty sequenced human genomes. PLoS Genet. 6, e1001111 (2010).
Zaghloul, N. A. et al. Functional analyses of variants reveal a significant role for dominant negative and common alleles in oligogenic Bardet–Biedl syndrome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 10602–10607 (2010).
Chassaing, N. et al. OTX2 mutations contribute to the otocephaly–dysgnathia complex. J. Med. Genet. 49, 373–379 (2012).
Kato, S. et al. Understanding the function–structure and function–mutation relationships of p53 tumor suppressor protein by high-resolution missense mutation analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 8424–8429 (2003).
Merveille, A. C. et al. CCDC39 is required for assembly of inner dynein arms and the dynein regulatory complex and for normal ciliary motility in humans and dogs. Nature Genet. 43, 72–78 (2011).
Rosenthal, N. & Brown, S. The mouse ascending: perspectives for human-disease models. Nature Cell Biol. 9, 993–999 (2007).
Siddiqui, S. S. et al. C. elegans as a model organism for in vivo screening in cancer: effects of human c-Met in lung cancer affect C. elegans vulva phenotypes. Cancer Biol. Ther. 7, 856–863 (2008).
Bick, D. & Dimmock, D. Whole exome and whole genome sequencing. Curr. Opin. Pediatr. 23, 594–600 (2011).
Drmanac, R. Medicine. The ultimate genetic test. Science 336, 1110–1112 (2012).
Brunham, L. R. & Hayden, M. R. Medicine. Whole-genome sequencing: the new standard of care? Science 336, 1112–1113 (2012).
Facio, F. M. et al. Intentions to receive individual results from whole-genome sequencing among participants in the ClinSeq study. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 21, 261–265 (2013).
Murphy, J. et al. Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research. Am. J. Bioeth. 8, 36–43 (2008).
Fullerton, S. M. et al. Return of individual research results from genome-wide association studies: experience of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) network. Genet. Med. 14, 424–431 (2012).
Jamal, S. M. et al. Practices and policies of clinical exome sequencing providers: analysis and implications. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 5 Apr 2013 (doi:10.1002/j.1552-4833.2013.35942.x). This paper presents ACMG guidelines for clinical exome sequencing.
Tabor, H. K. et al. Informed consent for whole genome sequencing: a qualitative analysis of participant expectations and perceptions of risks, benefits, and harms. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 158, 1310–1319 (2012).
Feero, W. G. & Green, E. D. Genomics education for health care professionals in the 21st century. JAMA 306, 989–990 (2011).
Haga, S. et al. Survey of genetic counselors and clinical geneticists' use and attitudes toward pharmacogenetic testing. Clin. Genet. 82, 115–120 (2012).
Dougherty, M. J., Pleasants, C., Solow, L., Wong, A. & Zhang, H. A comprehensive analysis of high school genetics standards: are States keeping pace with modern genetics? CBE Life Sci. Educ. 10, 318–327 (2011).
Redfield, R. J. “Why do we have to learn this stuff?”—a new genetics for 21st century students. PLoS Biol. 10, e1001356 (2012).
Guttmacher, A. E., Porteous, M. E. & McInerney, J. D. Educating health-care professionals about genetics and genomics. Nature Rev. Genet. 8, 151–157 (2007).
O'Daniel, J. M. The prospect of genome-guided preventive medicine: a need and opportunity for genetic counselors. J. Genet. Couns. 19, 315–327 (2010).
Jenkins, J. & Calzone, K. A. Establishing the essential nursing competencies for genetics and genomics. J. Nurs. Scholarsh. 39, 10–16 (2007).
Atkinson, N. L., Saperstein, S. L. & Pleis, J. Using the internet for health-related activities: findings from a national probability sample. J. Med. Internet Res. 11, e4 (2009).
van Uden-Kraan, C. F. et al. Health-related Internet use by patients with somatic diseases: frequency of use and characteristics of users. Inform Health Soc. Care 34, 18–29 (2009).
Bell, R. A., Hu, X., Orrange, S. E. & Kravitz, R. L. Lingering questions and doubts: online information-seeking of support forum members following their medical visits. Patient Educ. Couns. 85, 525–528 (2011).
Nambisan, P. Evaluating patient experience in online health communities: implications for health care organizations. Health Care Manage. Rev. 36, 124–133 (2010).
Shute, N. Connecting and sharing on the Web. At 'crowd-sourced' disease sites, patients can swap stories—and data. US News World Rep. 146, 82–83 (2009).
Swan, M. Crowdsourced health research studies: an important emerging complement to clinical trials in the public health research ecosystem. J. Med. Internet Res. 14, e46 (2012).
Wicks, P. et al. Sharing health data for better outcomes on PatientsLikeMe. J. Med. Internet Res. 12, e19 (2010).
Bollinger, J. M., Scott, J., Dvoskin, R. & Kaufman, D. Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genet. Med. 14, 451–457 (2012).
Kaufman, D., Murphy, J., Scott, J. & Hudson, K. Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study. Genet. Med. 10, 831–839 (2008).
Lemke, A. A., Wolf, W. A., Hebert-Beirne, J. & Smith, M. E. Public and biobank participant attitudes toward genetic research participation and data sharing. Publ. Health Genom. 13, 368–377 (2010).
Murphy, J. et al. Public perspectives on informed consent for biobanking. Am. J. Publ. Health 99, 2128–2134 (2009).
Willison, D. J. et al. Consent for use of personal information for health research: do people with potentially stigmatizing health conditions and the general public differ in their opinions? BMC Med. Eth. 10, 10 (2009).
Leighton, J. W., Valverde, K. & Bernhardt, B. A. The general public's understanding and perception of direct-to-consumer genetic test results. Pub. Health Genom. 15, 11–21 (2011).
Carbone, J. et al. DNA patents and diagnostics: not a pretty picture. Nature Biotech. 28, 784–791 (2010).
Cook-Deegan, R. et al. Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers. Genet. Med. 12, S15–S38 (2010).
Grosse, S. D., Kalman, L. & Khoury, M. J. Evaluation of the validity and utility of genetic testing for rare diseases. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 686, 115–131 (2010).
Eckermann, S. & Willan, A. R. Presenting evidence and summary measures to best inform societal decisions when comparing multiple strategies. Pharmacoeconomics 29, 563–577 (2011).
Douglas, P. S. & Ginsburg, G. S. Clinical genomic testing: getting it right. J. Cardiovasc. Transl. Res. 1, 17–20 (2008).
Dinan, M. A., Simmons, L. A. & Snyderman, R. Commentary: personalized health planning and the patient protection and affordable care act: an opportunity for academic medicine to lead health care reform. Acad. Med. 85, 1665–1668 (2010).
Chan, I. S. & Ginsburg, G. S. Personalized medicine: progress and promise. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 12, 217–244 (2011).
Strauss, K. A., Puffenberger, E. G. & Morton, D. H. One community's effort to control genetic disease. Am. J. Publ. Health 102, 1300–1306 (2012).
Schadt, E. E., Turner, S. & Kasarskis, A. A window into third-generation sequencing. Hum. Mol. Genet. 19, R227–R240 (2010).
Sanderson, K. Personal genomes: standard and pores. Nature 456, 23–25 (2008).
Badano, J. L. & Katsanis, N. Beyond Mendel: an evolving view of human genetic disease transmission. Nature Rev. Genet. 3, 779–789 (2002). This Review describes muti-locus inheritance as seen in both rare and complex disorders.
Zaghloul, N. A. & Katsanis, N. Functional modules, mutational load and human genetic disease. Trends Genet. 26, 168–176 (2010). This is a review of approaches to model genomic variants in vivo to determine functionality.
Giess, R. et al. Early onset of severe familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with a SOD-1 mutation: potential impact of CNTF as a candidate modifier gene. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 70, 1277–1286 (2002).
Lyon, G. J. et al. Exome sequencing and unrelated findings in the context of complex disease research: ethical and clinical implications. Discov. Med. 12, 41–55 (2011).
Christenhusz, G. M., Devriendt, K. & Dierickx, K. To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 21, 248–255 (2012).
Lunshof, J. E., Chadwick, R., Vorhaus, D. B. & Church, G. M. From genetic privacy to open consent. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 406–411 (2008). This paper describes the challenges of handling genome-wide data in a research setting.
Ball, M. P. et al. A public resource facilitating clinical use of genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 11920–11927 (2012). The Genome–Environment–Trait Evidence (GET-Evidence) tool is introduced here; it is used for processing personal whole-genome data.
Marchant, G. E., Milligan, R. J. & Wilhelmi, B. Legal pressures and incentives for personalized medicine. Per. Med. 3, 391–397 (2006).
Bradbury, A. R. et al. Parent opinions regarding the genetic testing of minors for BRCA1/2. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 3498–3505 (2010).
Clarke, A. The genetic testing of children. Working Party of the Clinical Genetics Society (UK). J. Med. Genet. 31, 785–797 (1994).
Duncan, R. E., Savulescu, J., Gillam, L., Williamson, R. & Delatycki, M. B. An international survey of predictive genetic testing in children for adult onset conditions. Genet. Med. 7, 390–396 (2005).
Hawkins, A. K., Ho, A. & Hayden, M. R. Lessons from predictive testing for Huntington disease: 25 years on. J. Med. Genet. 48, 649–650 (2011).
Cohen, C. B. Wrestling with the future: should we test children for adult-onset genetic conditions? Kennedy Inst. Eth. J. 8, 111–130 (1998).
Robertson, S. & Savulescu, J. Is there a case in favour of predictive genetic testing in young children? Bioethics 15, 26–49 (2001).
Van Hoyweghen, I. & Horstman, K. European practices of genetic information and insurance: lessons for the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. JAMA 300, 326–327 (2008).
Hudson, K. L. Genomics, health care, and society. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 1033–1041 (2011).
Department of Health and Human Services. HIPAA administrative simplification: standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information. Federal Register [online], (2009).
Allain, D. C., Friedman, S. & Senter, L. Consumer awareness and attitudes about insurance discrimination post enactment of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Fam. Cancer 11, 637–644 (2012).
Haga, S. B. et al. Genomic risk profiling: attitudes and use in personal and clinical care of primary care physicians who offer risk profiling. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 26, 834–840 (2011).
Hudson, K. L. et al. Oversight of US genetic testing laboratories. Nature Biotech. 24, 1083–1090 (2006).
Horn, E. J. & Terry, S. F. Regulating genetic tests: issues that guide policy decisions. Genet. Test. Mol. Biomarkers 16, 1–2 (2012).
Borry, P., Nys, H. & Dierickx, K. Carrier testing in minors: conflicting views. Nature Rev. Genet. 8, 828 (2007).
Borry, P., Stultiens, L., Nys, H. & Dierickx, K. Attitudes towards predictive genetic testing in minors for familial breast cancer: a systematic review. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 64, 173–181 (2007).
Moran, C., Thornburg, C. D. & Barfield, R. C. Ethical considerations for pharmacogenomic testing in pediatric clinical care and research. Pharmacogenomics 12, 889–895 (2011).
Acknowledgements
The authors thank E. Davis and M. Angrist for their thoughtful suggestions for this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Related links
FURTHER INFORMATION
Glossary
- Large-insert clone
-
A large haplotype fragment that is inserted into, for example, a bacterial artificial chromosome.
- Oligonucleotide arrays
-
Hybridization of a nucleic acid sample to a very large set of oligonucleotide probes, which are attached to a solid support, to determine sequence, to detect variations or to carry out gene expression or mapping.
- Exome
-
The collection of protein-coding regions (exons) in the genome. As exons comprise only 1% of the genome and contain the most easily understood and functionally relevant information, sequencing of only the exome is an efficient method of identifying many variants that are likely to affect a trait.
- Next-generation sequencing
-
(NGS). NGS platforms sequence as many as billions of DNA strands in parallel, yielding substantially more throughput than Sanger sequencing and minimizing the need for the fragment-cloning methods that are often used in Sanger sequencing of genomes.
- Direct genetic testing
-
Testing that looks at the presence or absence of known genetic variants that contribute to pathogenicity.
- Indirect genetic testing
-
Testing that compares the genetic regions of multiple affected persons to unaffected persons. Indirect genetic tests may evaluate patterns of inheritance in multiple family members with a known trait and look at the segregation of the trait with genetic markers.
- Linkage analysis
-
A statistical method for identifying a region of the genome that is implicated in a trait by observing which region is inherited from the parental strain carrying the trait in offspring that carry the trait.
- Single-nucleotide polymorphisms
-
(SNPs). Differences in the nucleotide composition at single positions in the DNA sequence.
- Short tandem repeats
-
(STRs). DNA sequences containing a variable number of highly polymorphic, tandemly repeated short (2–6 bp) sequences.
- Non-invasive prenatal testing
-
(NIPT). A method of obtaining a prenatal diagnosis by detecting fetal cells circulating in maternal blood.
- Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis
-
(PGD). An in vitro method of identifying genetic defects in in vitro fertilization embryos before maternal transfer and implant.
- Sanger sequencing
-
A method used to determine the nucleotides present in a fragment of DNA. It is based on the chain terminator method developed by Frederick Sanger but currently uses labelling of the chain terminator dideoxynucleotides, allowing sequencing in a single reaction.
- Array comparative genomic hybridization
-
(Array CGH). A microarray-based method of identifying differences in DNA copy number by comparing a sampled genome to a reference genome.
- Penetrance
-
The proportion of individuals with a given genotype who display a particular phenotype.
- Fluorescent in situ hybridization
-
(FISH). A molecular and cytogenetic method using a fluorescently labelled DNA probe to detect a particular chromosome or gene using fluorescence microscopy.
- Uniparental disomy
-
(UPD). An occurrence of an individual inheriting both copies of her chromosome from one parent.
- Restriction fragment length polymorphisms
-
(RFLP). Variations between individuals in the lengths of DNA regions that are cut by a particular endonuclease.
- Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification
-
(MLPA). A molecular technique involving the ligation of two adjacent annealing oligonucleotides followed by quantitative PCR amplification of the ligated products, allowing the characterization of chromosomal aberrations in copy number or sequence and single-nucleotide polymorphism or mutation detection.
- Copy number variants
-
(CNVs). Structural genomic variants that result in copy number changes in specific chromosomal regions. Usually, there are two copies of each locus, but if, for example, duplications or triplications occur, then the number of copies will increase.
- Variants of unknown significance
-
(VUSs). Alterations in the sequence of a gene, the significance of which are unclear.
- Genetic determinism
-
The idea that genes and genetic variants are the primary factor determining and shaping human traits.
- Epigenomics
-
Describes a heritable effect on chromosome or gene function that is not accompanied by a change in DNA sequence but rather by modifications of chromatin or DNA.
- Epialleles
-
An epigenetic variant of an allele. The activity of an epiallele is dependent on epigenetic modifications such as histone deacetylation or cytosine methylation.
- Genetic exceptionalism
-
The view that genetic information, traits and properties are qualitatively different and deserving of exceptional consideration.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Katsanis, S., Katsanis, N. Molecular genetic testing and the future of clinical genomics. Nat Rev Genet 14, 415–426 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3493
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3493
This article is cited by
-
Rare genetic diseases in India: Steps toward a nationwide mission program
Journal of Biosciences (2024)
-
Detection of 13 Novel Variants and Investigation of Mutation Distribution by Next Generation Sequencing in Hemoglobinopathies: A Single Center Experience
Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion (2023)
-
Diagnostik und Management von Patient*innen mit erblichen Netzhautdegenerationen in Deutschland
Die Ophthalmologie (2023)
-
A systematic review and functional bioinformatics analysis of genes associated with Crohn’s disease identify more than 120 related genes
BMC Genomics (2022)
-
Gene-drug pairings for antidepressants and antipsychotics: level of evidence and clinical application
Molecular Psychiatry (2022)
