Cargando…
Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes
BACKGROUND: In the field of movement disorders, what you see (phenotype) is seldom what you get (genotype). Whereas 1 phenotype was previously associated to 1 gene, the advent of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated an exponential increase in disease‐causing genes and genotype–phenotype...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8015914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33816658 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.13163 |
_version_ | 1783673766614663168 |
---|---|
author | Gannamani, Rahul van der Veen, Sterre van Egmond, Martje de Koning, Tom J. Tijssen, Marina A.J. |
author_facet | Gannamani, Rahul van der Veen, Sterre van Egmond, Martje de Koning, Tom J. Tijssen, Marina A.J. |
author_sort | Gannamani, Rahul |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the field of movement disorders, what you see (phenotype) is seldom what you get (genotype). Whereas 1 phenotype was previously associated to 1 gene, the advent of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated an exponential increase in disease‐causing genes and genotype–phenotype correlations, and the “one‐phenotype‐many‐genes” paradigm has become prominent. OBJECTIVES: To highlight the “one‐phenotype‐many‐genes” paradigm by discussing the main challenges, perspectives on how to address them, and future directions. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of the various aspects involved in identifying the underlying molecular cause of a movement disorder phenotype. RESULTS: The notable challenges are (1) the lack of gold standards, overlap in clinical spectrum of different movement disorders, and variability in the interpretation of classification systems; (2) selecting which patients benefit from genetic tests and the choice of genetic testing; (3) problems in the variant interpretation guidelines; (4) the filtering of variants associated with disease; and (5) the lack of standardized, complete, and up‐to‐date gene lists. Perspectives to address these include (1) deep phenotyping and genotype–phenotype integration, (2) adherence to phenotype‐specific diagnostic algorithms, (3) implementation of current and complementary bioinformatic tools, (4) a clinical‐molecular diagnosis through close collaboration between clinicians and genetic laboratories, and (5) ongoing curation of gene lists and periodic reanalysis of genetic sequencing data. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the rapidly emerging possibilities of NGS, there are still many steps to take to improve the genetic diagnostic yield. Future directions, including post‐NGS phenotyping and cohort analyses enriched by genotype–phenotype integration and gene networks, ought to be pursued to accelerate identification of disease‐causing genes and further improve our understanding of disease biology. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8015914 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80159142021-04-02 Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes Gannamani, Rahul van der Veen, Sterre van Egmond, Martje de Koning, Tom J. Tijssen, Marina A.J. Mov Disord Clin Pract Reviews BACKGROUND: In the field of movement disorders, what you see (phenotype) is seldom what you get (genotype). Whereas 1 phenotype was previously associated to 1 gene, the advent of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated an exponential increase in disease‐causing genes and genotype–phenotype correlations, and the “one‐phenotype‐many‐genes” paradigm has become prominent. OBJECTIVES: To highlight the “one‐phenotype‐many‐genes” paradigm by discussing the main challenges, perspectives on how to address them, and future directions. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of the various aspects involved in identifying the underlying molecular cause of a movement disorder phenotype. RESULTS: The notable challenges are (1) the lack of gold standards, overlap in clinical spectrum of different movement disorders, and variability in the interpretation of classification systems; (2) selecting which patients benefit from genetic tests and the choice of genetic testing; (3) problems in the variant interpretation guidelines; (4) the filtering of variants associated with disease; and (5) the lack of standardized, complete, and up‐to‐date gene lists. Perspectives to address these include (1) deep phenotyping and genotype–phenotype integration, (2) adherence to phenotype‐specific diagnostic algorithms, (3) implementation of current and complementary bioinformatic tools, (4) a clinical‐molecular diagnosis through close collaboration between clinicians and genetic laboratories, and (5) ongoing curation of gene lists and periodic reanalysis of genetic sequencing data. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the rapidly emerging possibilities of NGS, there are still many steps to take to improve the genetic diagnostic yield. Future directions, including post‐NGS phenotyping and cohort analyses enriched by genotype–phenotype integration and gene networks, ought to be pursued to accelerate identification of disease‐causing genes and further improve our understanding of disease biology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8015914/ /pubmed/33816658 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.13163 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Movement Disorders Clinical Practice published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Reviews Gannamani, Rahul van der Veen, Sterre van Egmond, Martje de Koning, Tom J. Tijssen, Marina A.J. Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title | Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title_full | Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title_fullStr | Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title_full_unstemmed | Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title_short | Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype – Many Genes |
title_sort | challenges in clinicogenetic correlations: one phenotype – many genes |
topic | Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8015914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33816658 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.13163 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gannamanirahul challengesinclinicogeneticcorrelationsonephenotypemanygenes AT vanderveensterre challengesinclinicogeneticcorrelationsonephenotypemanygenes AT vanegmondmartje challengesinclinicogeneticcorrelationsonephenotypemanygenes AT dekoningtomj challengesinclinicogeneticcorrelationsonephenotypemanygenes AT tijssenmarinaaj challengesinclinicogeneticcorrelationsonephenotypemanygenes |