Clinical testing panels for ALS: global distribution, consistency, and challenges

Allison A. Dilliott*, Ahmad Al Nasser, Marwa Elnagheeb, Jennifer Fifita, Lyndal Henden, Ingrid M. Keseler, Steven Lenz, Heather Marriott, Emily Mccann, Maysen Mesaros, Sarah Opie-Martin, Emma Owens, Brooke Palus, Justyne Ross, Zhanjun Wang, Hannah White, Ammar Al-Chalabi, Peter M. Andersen, Michael Benatar, Ian BlairJohnathan Cooper-Knock, Elizabeth A. Harrington, Jeannine Heckmann, John Landers, Cristiane Moreno, Melissa Nel, Evadnie Rampersaud, Jennifer Roggenbuck, Guy Rouleau, Bryan Traynor, Marka Van Blitterswijk, Wouter Van Rheenen, Jan Veldink, Jochen Weishaupt, Luke Drury, Matthew B. Harms, Sali M.K. Farhan*,

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: In 2021, the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) spectrum disorders Gene Curation Expert Panel (GCEP) was established to evaluate the strength of evidence for genes previously reported to be associated with ALS. Through this endeavor, we will provide standardized guidance to laboratories on which genes should be included in clinical genetic testing panels for ALS. In this manuscript, we aimed to assess the heterogeneity in the current global landscape of clinical genetic testing for ALS. Methods: We reviewed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Genetic Testing Registry (GTR) and members of the ALS GCEP to source frequently used testing panels and compare the genes included on the tests. Results: 14 clinical panels specific to ALS from 14 laboratories covered 4 to 54 genes. All panels report on ANG, SOD1, TARDBP, and VAPB; 50% included or offered the option of including C9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion (HRE) analysis. Of the 91 genes included in at least one of the panels, 40 (44.0%) were included on only a single panel. We could not find a direct link to ALS in the literature for 14 (15.4%) included genes. Conclusions: The variability across the surveyed clinical genetic panels is concerning due to the possibility of reduced diagnostic yields in clinical practice and risk of a missed diagnoses for patients. Our results highlight the necessity for consensus regarding the appropriateness of gene inclusions in clinical genetic ALS tests to improve its application for patients living with ALS and their families.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)420-435
Number of pages16
JournalAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration
Volume24
Issue number5-6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2023

Keywords

  • Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
  • clinical laboratories
  • gene panels
  • gene-disease relationships
  • genetic testing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical testing panels for ALS: global distribution, consistency, and challenges'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this