The term hereditary ataxia (HA) refers to a heterogeneous group of neurological disorders with multiple genetic etiologies and a wide spectrum of ataxia‐dominated phenotypes. Massive gene analysis in next‐generation sequencing has entered the HA scenario, broadening our genetic and clinical knowledge of these conditions. In this study, we employed a targeted resequencing panel (TRP) in a large and highly heterogeneous cohort of 377 patients with a clinical diagnosis of HA, but no molecular diagnosis on routine genetic tests. We obtained a positive result (genetic diagnosis) in 33.2% of the patients, a rate significantly higher than those reported in similar studies employing TRP (average 19.4%), and in line with those performed using exome sequencing (ES, average 34.6%). Moreover, 15.6% of the patients had an uncertain molecular diagnosis. STUB1, PRKCG, and SPG7 were the most common causative genes. A comparison with published literature data showed that our panel would have identified 97% of the positive cases reported in previous TRP‐based studies and 92% of those diagnosed by ES. Proper use of multigene panels, when combined with detailed phenotypic data, seems to be even more efficient than ES in clinical practice.

Ngs in hereditary ataxia: When rare becomes frequent

Musumeci O.;Trovato R.;
2021-01-01

Abstract

The term hereditary ataxia (HA) refers to a heterogeneous group of neurological disorders with multiple genetic etiologies and a wide spectrum of ataxia‐dominated phenotypes. Massive gene analysis in next‐generation sequencing has entered the HA scenario, broadening our genetic and clinical knowledge of these conditions. In this study, we employed a targeted resequencing panel (TRP) in a large and highly heterogeneous cohort of 377 patients with a clinical diagnosis of HA, but no molecular diagnosis on routine genetic tests. We obtained a positive result (genetic diagnosis) in 33.2% of the patients, a rate significantly higher than those reported in similar studies employing TRP (average 19.4%), and in line with those performed using exome sequencing (ES, average 34.6%). Moreover, 15.6% of the patients had an uncertain molecular diagnosis. STUB1, PRKCG, and SPG7 were the most common causative genes. A comparison with published literature data showed that our panel would have identified 97% of the positive cases reported in previous TRP‐based studies and 92% of those diagnosed by ES. Proper use of multigene panels, when combined with detailed phenotypic data, seems to be even more efficient than ES in clinical practice.
2021
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11570/3212057
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 12
social impact