Review Article | Published:

Carrier screening for recessive disorders

Abstract

Technological and other advances over the past decades have led to the discovery of thousands of gene–disease associations for autosomal and X-linked recessive Mendelian disorders. Combined with recent improvements in assessing individual variants in each human genome, these developments offer the possibility of testing populations for all known severe recessive genetic disorders. Past experience has provided the framework for expanded carrier screening, but many challenges remain regarding which disorders to include, how to interpret variants and how to incorporate newly discovered gene–disease links into existing screening programmes.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Stamatoyannoulos, G. in Birth Defects: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference (International Congress Series No. 310) (eds Motulsky, A. G. & Ebling, F. J. G.) 268–276 (Excerpta Medica, 1974). This report describes the first pioneer carrier screening.

  2. 2.

    Solomon, B. D., Nguyen, A. D., Bear, K. A. & Wolfsberg, T. G. Clinical genomic database. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9851–9855 (2013).

  3. 3.

    van der Hout, S., Dondorp, W. & de Wert, G. The aims of expanded universal carrier screening: autonomy, prevention, and responsible parenthood. Bioethics. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12555 (2019).

  4. 4.

    Kraft, S. A., Duenas, D., Wilfond, B. S. & Goddard, K. A. B. The evolving landscape of expanded carrier screening: challenges and opportunities. Genet. Med. 21, 790–797 (2019).

  5. 5.

    Baird, P. A., Anderson, T. W., Newcombe, H. B. & Lowry, R. B. Genetic disorders in children and young adults: a population study. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 42, 677–693 (1988).

  6. 6.

    Verma, I. C. & Puri, R. D. Global burden of genetic disease and the role of genetic screening. Semin. Fetal Neonatal Med. 20, 354–363 (2015).

  7. 7.

    Allison, A. C. Protection afforded by sickle-cell trait against subtertian malareal infection. Br. Med. J. 1, 290–294 (1954). This study provides the first historical link between the sickle cell trait and malaria.

  8. 8.

    Abouelhoda, M. et al. Clinical genomics can facilitate countrywide estimation of autosomal recessive disease burden. Genet. Med. 18, 1244–1249 (2016).

  9. 9.

    Makrythanasis, P. et al. Diagnostic exome sequencing to elucidate the genetic basis of likely recessive disorders in consanguineous families. Hum. Mutat. 35, 1203–1210 (2014).

  10. 10.

    Ropers, H. H. Genetics of early onset cognitive impairment. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 11, 161–187 (2010).

  11. 11.

    Akawi, N. et al. Discovery of four recessive developmental disorders using probabilistic genotype and phenotype matching among 4,125 families. Nat. Genet. 47, 1363–1369 (2015).

  12. 12.

    Martin, H. C. et al. Quantifying the contribution of recessive coding variation to developmental disorders. Science 362, 1161–1164 (2018).

  13. 13.

    Karczewski, K. J. et al. Variation across 141,456 human exomes and genomes reveals the spectrum of loss-of-function intolerance across human protein-coding genes. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/531210 (2019).

  14. 14.

    Lek, M. et al. Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans. Nature 536, 285–291 (2016). This study describes a freely available and extensive database of genomic variants, generated as part of ExAC, that is extremely useful for diagnostic evaluation.

  15. 15.

    Saleheen, D. et al. Human knockouts and phenotypic analysis in a cohort with a high rate of consanguinity. Nature 544, 235–239 (2017).

  16. 16.

    Dewey, F. E. et al. Distribution and clinical impact of functional variants in 50,726 whole-exome sequences from the DiscovEHR study. Science 354, aaf6814 (2016). An exemplary study of population genomic medicine.

  17. 17.

    Telenti, A. et al. Deep sequencing of 10,000 human genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 11901–11906 (2016).

  18. 18.

    Samuel, G. N. & Farsides, B. The UK’s 100,000 Genomes Project: manifesting policymakers’ expectations. New Genet. Soc. 36, 336–353 (2017).

  19. 19.

    Short, P. J. et al. De novo mutations in regulatory elements in neurodevelopmental disorders. Nature 555, 611–616 (2018).

  20. 20.

    The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium. et al. A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature 467, 1061–1073 (2010).

  21. 21.

    Xue, Y. et al. Deleterious- and disease-allele prevalence in healthy individuals: insights from current predictions, mutation databases, and population-scale resequencing. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 91, 1022–1032 (2012).

  22. 22.

    Gonzaga-Jauregui, C., Lupski, J. R. & Gibbs, R. A. Human genome sequencing in health and disease. Annu. Rev. Med. 63, 35–61 (2012).

  23. 23.

    Lazarin, G. A. et al. An empirical estimate of carrier frequencies for 400+ causal Mendelian variants: results from an ethnically diverse clinical sample of 23,453 individuals. Genet. Med. 15, 178–186 (2013).

  24. 24.

    Crow, J. F. Eighty years ago: the beginnings of population genetics. Genetics 119, 473–476 (1988).

  25. 25.

    Haque, I. S. et al. Modeled fetal risk of genetic diseases identified by expanded carrier screening. JAMA 316, 734–742 (2016).

  26. 26.

    Kahrizi, K. et al. Effect of inbreeding on intellectual disability revisited by trio sequencing. Clin. Genet. 95, 151–159 (2019).

  27. 27.

    Romeo, G. & Bittles, A. H. Consanguinity in the contemporary world. Hum. Hered. 77, 6–9 (2014).

  28. 28.

    Bittles, A. H. A community genetics perspective on consanguineous marriage. Commun. Genet. 11, 324–330 (2008).

  29. 29.

    Hamamy, H. et al. Consanguineous marriages, pearls and perils: Geneva International Consanguinity Workshop report. Genet. Med. 13, 841–847 (2011).

  30. 30.

    Bittles, A. Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clin. Genet. 60, 89–98 (2001).

  31. 31.

    Small, N., Bittles, A. H., Petherick, E. S. & Wright, J. Endogamy, consanguinity and the health implications of changing marital choices in the UK Pakistani community. J. Biosoc. Sci. 49, 435–446 (2017).

  32. 32.

    Monies, D. et al. The landscape of genetic diseases in Saudi Arabia based on the first 1000 diagnostic panels and exomes. Hum. Genet. 136, 921–939 (2017).

  33. 33.

    Ceballos, F. C., Joshi, P. K., Clark, D. W., Ramsay, M. & Wilson, J. F. Runs of homozygosity: windows into population history and trait architecture. Nat. Rev. Genet. 19, 220–234 (2018).

  34. 34.

    Bobadilla, J. L., Macek, M. Jr, Fine, J. P. & Farrell, P. M. Cystic fibrosis: a worldwide analysis of CFTR mutations — correlation with incidence data and application to screening. Hum. Mutat. 19, 575–606 (2002).

  35. 35.

    Committee on Genetics. Committee opinion no. 691: carrier screening for genetic conditions. Obstet. Gynecol. 129, e41–e55 (2017).

  36. 36.

    Rosner, G., Rosner, S. & Orr-Urtreger, A. Genetic testing in Israel: an overview. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 10, 175–192 (2009).

  37. 37.

    Beutler, E. Gaucher disease. Curr. Opin. Hematol. 4, 19–23 (1997).

  38. 38.

    Watson, M. S., Lloyd-Puryear, M. A., Mann, M. Y., Rinaldo, P. & Howell, R. R. Main report. Genet. Med. 8 (Suppl. 1), 12S–252S (2006).

  39. 39.

    Lazarin, G. A. et al. Systematic classification of disease severity for evaluation of expanded carrier screening panels. PLOS ONE 9, e114391 (2014).

  40. 40.

    Bell, C. J. et al. Carrier testing for severe childhood recessive diseases by next-generation sequencing. Sci. Transl Med. 3, 65ra4 (2011).

  41. 41.

    Himes, P. et al. Genome sequencing and carrier testing: decisions on categorization and whether to disclose results of carrier testing. Genet. Med. 19, 803–808 (2017).

  42. 42.

    Punj, S. et al. Preconception carrier screening by genome sequencing: results from the clinical laboratory. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 102, 1078–1089 (2018).

  43. 43.

    Lettre, G. et al. DNA polymorphisms at the BCL11A, HBS1L-MYB, and beta-globin loci associate with fetal hemoglobin levels and pain crises in sickle cell disease. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 11869–11874 (2008).

  44. 44.

    Landrum, M. J. et al. ClinVar: improving access to variant interpretations and supporting evidence. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D1062–D1067 (2018). A database of interpretation of genomic variants that is extremely useful for diagnostic evaluation.

  45. 45.

    Lee, J. S. et al. Reclassification of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants of uncertain significance: a multifactorial analysis of multicentre prospective cohort. J. Med. Genet. 55, 794–802 (2018).

  46. 46.

    Need, A. C. & Goldstein, D. B. Next generation disparities in human genomics: concerns and remedies. Trends Genet. 25, 489–494 (2009).

  47. 47.

    Badano, J. L. & Katsanis, N. Beyond Mendel: an evolving view of human genetic disease transmission. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 779–789 (2002).

  48. 48.

    Ansar, M. et al. Visual impairment and progressive phthisis bulbi caused by recessive pathogenic variant in MARK3. Hum. Mol. Genet. 27, 2703–2711 (2018).

  49. 49.

    Serjeant, G. R. et al. Hb S-β-thalassemia: molecular, hematological and clinical comparisons. Hemoglobin 35, 1–12 (2011).

  50. 50.

    Raraigh, K. S. et al. Functional assays are essential for interpretation of missense variants associated with variable expressivity. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 102, 1062–1077 (2018).

  51. 51.

    Langley, S. D., Lai, K., Dembure, P. P., Hjelm, L. N. & Elsas, L. J. Molecular basis for Duarte and Los Angeles variant galactosemia. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 60, 366–372 (1997).

  52. 52.

    Kaback, M. M. & Desnick, R. J. Hexosaminidase A deficiency. GeneReviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1218/?report=classic (updated 11 Aug 2011).

  53. 53.

    Thauvin-Robinet, C. et al. CFTR p. Arg117His associated with CBAVD and other CFTR-related disorders. J. Med. Genet. 50, 220–227 (2013).

  54. 54.

    Chokoshvili, D., Borry, P. & Vears, D. F. A systematic analysis of online marketing materials used by providers of expanded carrier screening. Genet. Med. 20, 976–984 (2018).

  55. 55.

    Chokoshvili, D., Vears, D. & Borry, P. Expanded carrier screening for monogenic disorders: where are we now? Prenat. Diagn. 38, 59–66 (2018).

  56. 56.

    Kroos, M. A. et al. Glycogen storage disease type II: frequency of three common mutant alleles and their associated clinical phenotypes studied in 121 patients. J. Med. Genet. 32, 836–837 (1995).

  57. 57.

    Ceyhan-Birsoy, O. et al. Interpretation of genomic sequencing results in healthy and Ill newborns: results from the BabySeq project. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 104, 76–93 (2019).

  58. 58.

    Committee on Bioethics. et al. Ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Pediatrics 131, 620–622 (2013).

  59. 59.

    Lynch, F. L. et al. Time costs for genetic counseling in preconception carrier screening with genome sequencing. J. Genet. Couns. 27, 823–833 (2018).

  60. 60.

    Cao, A. & Kan, Y. W. The prevention of thalassemia. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 3, a011775 (2013).

  61. 61.

    Weatherall, D. J. The inherited diseases of hemoglobin are an emerging global health burden. Blood 115, 4331–4336 (2010).

  62. 62.

    Angastiniotis, M. A. & Hadjiminas, M. G. Prevention of thalassaemia in Cyprus. Lancet 1, 369–371 (1981).

  63. 63.

    Loukopoulos, D. Current status of thalassemia and the sickle cell syndromes in Greece. Semin. Hematol. 33, 76–86 (1996).

  64. 64.

    Cao, A., Galanello, R., Rosatelli, M. C., Argiolu, F. & De Virgiliis, S. Clinical experience of management of thalassemia: the Sardinian experience. Semin. Hematol. 33, 66–75 (1996).

  65. 65.

    Cao, A. et al. Prevention of homozygous β-thalassemia by carrier screening and prenatal diagnosis in Sardinia. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 33, 592–605 (1981). This publication describes the success of a pioneer carrier screening programme for β-thalassaemia.

  66. 66.

    Kalokairinou, E. M. The experience of β-thalassaemia and its prevention in Cyprus. Med. Law 26, 291–307 (2007).

  67. 67.

    Angastiniotis, M. & Modell, B. Global epidemiology of hemoglobin disorders. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 850, 251–269 (1998).

  68. 68.

    Cao, A. Results of programmes for antenatal detection of thalassemia in reducing the incidence of the disorder. Blood Rev. 1, 169–176 (1987).

  69. 69.

    Okada, S. & O’Brien, J. S. Tay–Sachs disease: generalized absence of a β-d-N-acetylhexosaminidase component. Science 165, 698–700 (1969).

  70. 70.

    Kaback, M. & Zeigler, R. in Sphingolipids, Sphingolipidoses and Allied Disorders: Proceedings of the Symposium on Sphingolipidoses and Allied Disorders Vol. 19 (eds Volk, B. W. & Aronson, S. M.) 613–632 (Springer, 1972).

  71. 71.

    Kaback, M. et al. Tay–Sachs disease — carrier screening, prenatal diagnosis, and the molecular era. An international perspective, 1970 to 1993. The International TSD Data Collection Network. JAMA 270, 2307–2315 (1993). This study describes the success of a pioneer carrier screening programme for Tay–Sachs disease.

  72. 72.

    Gason, A. A., Delatycki, M. B., Metcalfe, S. A. & Aitken, M. It’s “back to school” for genetic screening. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 14, 384–389 (2006).

  73. 73.

    Kerem, B. et al. Identification of the cystic fibrosis gene: genetic analysis. Science 245, 1073–1080 (1989).

  74. 74.

    Riordan, J. R. et al. Identification of the cystic fibrosis gene: cloning and characterization of complementary DNA. Science 245, 1066–1073 (1989).

  75. 75.

    Watson, M. S. et al. Cystic fibrosis population carrier screening: 2004 revision of American College of Medical Genetics Mutation Panel. Genet. Med. 6, 387–391 (2004).

  76. 76.

    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 486: update on carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. Obstet. Gynecol. 117, 1028–1031 (2011).

  77. 77.

    Morgan, M. A., Driscoll, D. A., Mennuti, M. T. & Schulkin, J. Practice patterns of obstetrician-gynecologists regarding preconception and prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis. Genet. Med. 6, 450–455 (2004).

  78. 78.

    Ioannou, L. et al. Population-based carrier screening for cystic fibrosis: a systematic review of 23 years of research. Genet. Med. 16, 207–216 (2014).

  79. 79.

    Castellani, C. et al. Association between carrier screening and incidence of cystic fibrosis. JAMA 302, 2573–2579 (2009).

  80. 80.

    Cunningham, S. & Marshall, T. Influence of five years of antenatal screening on the paediatric cystic fibrosis population in one region. Arch. Dis. Child. 78, 345–348 (1998).

  81. 81.

    Hale, J. E., Parad, R. B. & Comeau, A. M. Newborn screening showing decreasing incidence of cystic fibrosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 973–974 (2008).

  82. 82.

    Ramsey, B. W. et al. A CFTR potentiator in patients with cystic fibrosis and the G551D mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 1663–1672 (2011).

  83. 83.

    Massie, J., Castellani, C. & Grody, W. W. Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis in the new era of medications that restore CFTR function. Lancet 383, 923–925 (2014).

  84. 84.

    Taylor-Cousar, J. L. et al. Tezacaftor-ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for Phe508del. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 2013–2023 (2017).

  85. 85.

    Archibald, A. D. et al. Reproductive genetic carrier screening for cystic fibrosis, fragile X syndrome, and spinal muscular atrophy in Australia: outcomes of 12,000 tests. Genet. Med. 20, 513–523 (2018).

  86. 86.

    Henneman, L. et al. Responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, e1–e12 (2016).

  87. 87.

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee opinion no. 690 summary: carrier screening in the age of genomic medicine. Obstet. Gynecol. 129, 595–596 (2017).

  88. 88.

    Grody, W. W. et al. ACMG position statement on prenatal/preconception expanded carrier screening. Genet. Med. 15, 482–483 (2013).

  89. 89.

    Edwards, J. G. et al. Expanded carrier screening in reproductive medicine-points to consider: a joint statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstet. Gynecol. 125, 653–662 (2015).

  90. 90.

    Ager, S. L. The power of excess: royal incest and the ptolemaic dynasty. Anthropologica 48, 165–186 (2006).

  91. 91.

    Lewis, R. Human Genetics: Concepts and Applications 10th edn (McGraw-Hill Education, 2012).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks I. Kolpakov, M. Garieri, M. Ansar, E. Ranza, T. Papayannopoulou and H. C. Martin for discussions or preparation of figures, and the University of Geneva for continuous support. The author also thanks the three anonymous expert reviewers for their constructive comments.

Author information

Correspondence to Stylianos E. Antonarakis.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Related links

Clinical Genomic Database (CGD): https://research.nhgri.nih.gov/CGD/

ClinVar database: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/

Consanguinity and endogamy resource: http://consang.net/index.php/Main_Page

Cystic Fibrosis Mutation Database: http://www.genet.sickkids.on.ca/cftr/app

Dor Yeshorim: www.doryeshorim.org

Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) browser: http://exac.broadinstitute.org/

Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD): https://gnomad.broadinstitute.org/

gnomAD 7-117171028-C-T: https://gnomad.broadinstitute.org/variant/7-117171028-C-T

gnomAD 7-117230454-G-C: https://gnomad.broadinstitute.org/variant/7-117230454-G-C

Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM): https://www.omim.org/

The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG): https://www.acmg.net/

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG): https://www.acog.org/

The European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) Public and Professional Policy Committee: https://www.eshg.org/index.php?id=pppc

This Review is dedicated to the memory of Professor George Stamatoyannopoulos (1934–2018).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Glossary

Autosomal recessive inheritance

The mode of inheritance in which the phenotype is due to two pathogenic variants in the same gene: one in the paternal allele and the other in the maternal allele. The causative gene maps in one of the autosomes.

Carrier screening

The detection of unaffected individuals who harbour one copy of a pathogenic variant in a gene known to be involved in a recessive disorder.

X-linked disorders

Genetic disorders for which the pathogenic variant is on the X chromosome.

Expanded carrier screening

(ECS). Genetic testing for a large number of genetic disorders (generally 100 or more) simultaneously in 1 test. In this Review, ECS refers to the identification of carriers for the majority of severe Mendelian autosomal recessive and X-linked disorders beyond the traditional screening guidelines.

Endogamous

A term that refers to the practice of marrying within a specific social or ethnic community or otherwise closed population.

Consanguinity

Mating among close relatives, for example, first or second cousins.

Autozygosity

Also known as identity by descent. The inheritance of two alleles at a locus from a common ancestor due to inbreeding.

Founder effects

The loss of genetic variation when a new population is established by a very small number of individuals from a larger population.

Variable expressivity

A phenotype expressed to a different degree among individuals with the same genotype.

Penetrance

The fraction of individuals with a phenotype given a genotype known to cause a disease.

Compound heterozygosity

The condition of having two different pathogenic recessive variants, one in each parental allele, at a particular locus.

Copy number variants

(CNVs). Genomic variation due to different copies of a sequence in different alleles.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Fig. 1: Haploinsufficiency index for autosomal recessive and dominant genes.
Fig. 2: The Ptolemy dynasty, 323–30 bce.
Fig. 3: Likelihood of autosomal recessive disorders.
Fig. 4: Homozygosity regions in the genomes of outbred and inbred individuals.
Fig. 5: Potential different thresholds for the interpretation of variants of recessive genes in expanded carrier screening.