Abstract:Abstract IMPORTANCE Genetic diseases are a leading cause of childhood mortality. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) and whole exome sequencing (WES) are relatively new methods for diagnosing genetic diseases. OBJECTIVES Compare the diagnostic sensitivity (rate of causative, pathogenic or likely pathogenic genotypes in known disease genes) and rate of clinical utility (proportion in whom medical or surgical management was changed by diagnosis) of WGS, WES, and chromosomal microarrays (CMA) in children with suspected genetic diseases. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION Systematic review of the literature (January 2011 - August 2017) for studies of diagnostic sensitivity and/or clinical utility of WGS, WES, and/or CMA in children with suspected genetic diseases. 2% of identified studies met selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two investigators extracted data independently following MOOSE/PRISMA guidelines. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Pooled rates and 95% Cl were estimated with a random-effects model. Metaanalysis of the rate of diagnosis was based on test type, family structure, and site of testing. RESULTS In 36 observational series and one randomized control trial, comprising 20,068 children, the diagnostic sensitivity of WGS (0.41, 95% Cl 0.34-0.48, I 2 =44%) and WES (0.35, 95% Cl 0.31-0.39, I 2 =85%) were qualitatively greater than CMA (0.10, 95% Cl 0.08-0.12, I 2 =81%). Subgroup meta-analyses showed that the diagnostic sensitivity of WGS was significantly greater than CMA in studies published in 2017 ( P <.0001, I 2 =13% and I 2 =40%, respectively), and the diagnostic sensitivity of WES was significantly greater than CMA in studies featuring within-cohort comparisons ( P <001, I 2 =36%). Evidence for a significant difference in the diagnostic sensitivity of WGS and WES was lacking. In studies featuring within-cohort comparisons of singleton and trio WGS/WES, the likelihood of diagnosis was significantly greater for trios (odds ratio 2.04, 95% Cl 1.62-2.56, I 2 =12%; P <.0001). The diagnostic sensitivity of WGS/WES with hospital-based interpretation (0.41, 95% Cl 0.38-0.45, I 2 =50%) was qualitatively higher than that of reference laboratories (0.28, 95% Cl 0.24-0.32, I 2 =81%); this difference was significant in meta-analysis of studies published in 2017 ( P =.004, I 2 =34% and I 2 =26%, respectively). The rates of clinical utility of WGS (0.27, 95% Cl 0.17-0.40, I 2 =54%) and WES (0.18, 95% Cl 0.13-0.24, I 2 -77%) were higher than CMA (0.06, 95% Cl 0.05-0.07, I 2 =42%); this difference was significant in meta-analysis of WGS vs CMA ( P <.0001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In children with suspected genetic diseases, the diagnostic sensitivity and rate of clinical utility of WGS/WES were greater than CMA. Subgroups with higher WGS/WES diagnostic sensitivity were trios and those receiving hospital-based interpretation. WGS/WES should be considered a first-line genomic test for children with suspected genetic diseases. Key Points Question What is the relative diagnostic sensitivity and clinical utility of different genome tests in children with suspected genetic diseases? Findings Whole genome sequencing had greater diagnostic sensitivity and clinical utility than chromosomal microarrays. Testing parent-child trios had greater diagnostic sensitivity than proband singletons. Hospital-based testing had greater diagnostic sensitivity than reference laboratories. Meaning Trio genomic sequencing is the most sensitive diagnostic test for children with suspected genetic diseases.

Measuring perceived utility of genomic sequencing: Development and validation of the GENEtic Utility (GENE-U) scale for pediatric diagnostic testing

Measuring perceived utility of genomic sequencing: Development and validation of the GENEtic Utility (GENE-U) scale for adult screening

Key drivers of family-level utility of pediatric genomic sequencing: a qualitative analysis to support preference research

Evaluating parental personal utility of pediatric genetic and genomic testing in a diverse, multilingual population

Clinical utility of genomic sequencing: a measurement toolkit

A systematic review of the assessment of the clinical utility of genomic sequencing: Implications of the lack of standard definitions and measures of clinical utility

The Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) for Prenatal Care: Initial evidence of content and construct validity

Perceived utility of biological testing for autism spectrum disorder is associated with child and family functioning

Measuring health-related quality of life in children with suspected genetic conditions: validation of the PedsQL proxy-report versions

‘Diagnostic shock’: the impact of results from ultrarapid genomic sequencing of critically unwell children on aspects of family functioning

Genomic sequencing research in pediatric cancer care: Decision-making, attitudes, and perceived utility among adolescents and young adults and their parents

Developmental and epileptic encephalopathy: Personal utility of a genetic diagnosis for families

Evidence review and considerations for use of first line genome sequencing to diagnose rare genetic disorders

Patient Experience of Complex Genomic Sequencing Exploring Patient Preference, Barriers, and Enablers for Delivery

Meta-analysis of the diagnostic and clinical utility of genome and exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with suspected genetic diseases

Measuring genetic knowledge: a brief survey instrument for adolescents and adults

A Genomic Counseling Model for Population-Based Sequencing: A Pre-Post Intervention Study

The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial: Impact of GUÍA digitally enhanced genetic counseling in racially and ethnically diverse families

A meta-analysis of the diagnostic sensitivity and clinical utility of genome sequencing, exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with suspected genetic diseases

Developing a genetic services assessment tool to inform quality improvement efforts in state genetic service delivery

Participant experiences of genome sequencing for rare diseases in the 100,000 Genomes Project: a mixed methods study