Variant detection from long-read genome sequencing (lrGS) has proven to be more accurate and comprehensive than variant detection from short-read genome sequencing (srGS). However, the rate at which lrGS can increase molecular diagnostic yield for rare disease is not yet precisely characterized. We performed lrGS using Pacific Biosciences “HiFi” technology on 96 short-read-negative probands with rare diseases that were suspected to be genetic. We generated hg38-aligned variants and de novo phased genome assemblies, and subsequently annotated, filtered, and curated variants using clinical standards. New disease-relevant or potentially relevant genetic findings were identified in 16/96 (16.7%) probands, nine of which (8/96, ∼9.4%) harbored pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. Nine probands (∼9.4%) had variants that were accurately called in both srGS and lrGS and represent changes to clinical interpretation, mostly from recently published gene-disease associations. Seven cases included variants that were only correctly interpreted in lrGS, including copy-number variants (CNVs), an inversion, a mobile element insertion, two low-complexity repeat expansions, and a 1 bp deletion. While evidence for each of these variants is, in retrospect, visible in srGS, they were either not called within srGS data, were represented by calls with incorrect sizes or structures, or failed quality control and filtration. Thus, while reanalysis of older srGS data clearly increases diagnostic yield, we find that lrGS allows for substantial additional yield (7/96, 7.3%) beyond srGS. We anticipate that as lrGS analysis improves, and as lrGS data sets grow allowing for better variant-frequency annotation, the additional lrGS-only rare disease yield will grow over time.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, CF centers shifted to a telehealth delivery model. Our study aimed to determine how people with CF (PwCF) and their families experienced telehealth and assessed its quality and acceptability for future CF care. The CF Patient and Family State of Care Survey (PFSoC) was fielded from August 31-October 30, 2020. The PFSoC explored themes of overall telehealth quality, ease of use, desirability, and preference for a future mix of in-person and telehealth care. Demographic covariates considered included: gender, age, CFTR modulator status, and region of residence. 424 PwCF and parents of PwCF responded (47% parents). Most (81%) reported a telehealth visit which included a MD/APP and nurse team members. 91% found telehealth easy to use, and 66% reported similar/higher quality than in-person care. One-third (34%) reported the highest desire for future telehealth care, with 45% (n =212) desiring 50% or more of visits conducted via telehealth. Adults were more likely than parents to report highest desire for future telehealth (64% vs. 36%). Respondents who perceived telehealth as similar/higher quality were more likely to desire future telehealth compared to those who perceived telehealth as lower quality (96% vs. 50%). Mixed methods analysis revealed themes affecting perceptions of telehealth. PwCF desire for future telehealth was influenced by perception of quality and age. Several themes emerged that need to be explored as telehealth is adapted into the CF chronic care model, especially when thinking about integration into pediatric care.

We assessed the results of genome sequencing for early-onset dementia. Participants were selected from a memory disorders clinic. Genome sequencing was performed along with C9orf72 repeat expansion testing. All returned sequencing results were Sanger-validated. Prior clinical diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, and unspecified dementia. The mean age of onset was 54 (41–76). Fifty percent of patients had a strong family history, 37.5% had some, and 12.5% had no known family history. Nine of 32 patients (28%) had a variant defined as pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) by American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics standards, including variants in APP, C9orf72, CSF1R, and MAPT. Nine patients (including three with P/LP variants) harbored established risk alleles with moderate penetrance (odds ratios of ∼2–5) in ABCA7, AKAP9, GBA, PLD3, SORL1, and TREM2. All six patients harboring these moderate penetrance variants but not P/LP variants also had one or two APOE ε4 alleles. One patient had two APOE ε4 alleles with no other established contributors. In total, 16 patients (50%) harbored one or more genetic variants likely to explain symptoms. We identified variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in ABI3, ADAM10, ARSA, GRID2IP, MME, NOTCH3, PLCD1, PSEN1, TM2D3, TNK1, TTC3, and VPS13C, also often along with other variants. In summary, genome sequencing for early-onset dementia frequently identified multiple established or possible contributory alleles. These observations add support for an oligogenic model for early-onset dementia.

Background: The desire of parents to obtain a genetic diagnosis for their child with intellectual disability and associated symptoms has long been framed as a diagnostic odyssey, an arduous and sometimes perilous journey focused on the goal of identifying a cause for the child’s condition. Methods: Semi-structured interviews (N = 60) were conducted with parents of children (N = 59, aged 2–24 years) with intellectual disability and/or developmental delay (IDD) who underwent genome sequencing at a single pediatric multispecialty clinic. Interviews were conducted after parents received their child’s sequencing result (positive findings, negative findings, or variants of unknown significance). Thematic analysis was performed on all interviews. Results: Parents reported that obtaining a genetic diagnosis was one important step in their overall goal of helping their child live their best life possible life. They intended to use the result as a tool to help their child by seeking the correct school placement and obtaining benefits and therapeutic services. Conclusions: For the parents of children with IDD, the search for a genetic diagnosis is best conceptualized as a part of parents’ ongoing efforts to leverage various diagnoses to obtain educational and therapeutic services for their children. Cleaving parents’ search for a genetic diagnosis from these broader efforts obscures the value that some parents place on a sequencing result in finding and tailoring therapies and services beyond the clinic. Interviews with parents reveal, therefore, that genomic sequencing is best understood as one important stage of an ongoing therapeutic odyssey that largely takes place outside the clinic. Findings suggest the need to expand translational research efforts to contextualize a genetic diagnosis within parents’ broader efforts to obtain educational and therapeutic services outside clinical contexts.