Cited by 44Genomics and Rare DiseasesMetabolism and Genetic DisordersEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare

Genome-wide sequencing in acutely ill infants: genomic medicine’s critical application?

Open access
Friedman, Jan M., Bombard, Yvonne, Cornel, Martina C., Fernandez, Conrad V., Junker, Anne K., Plon, Sharon E., Stark, Zornitza, Knoppers, Bartha Maria·2019·Genetics in Medicine

Abstract

Diagnostic genome-wide sequencing (exome or genome sequencing and data analysis for high-penetrance disease-causing variants) in acutely ill infants appears to be clinically useful, but the value of this diagnostic test should be rigorously demonstrated before it is accepted as a standard of care. This white paper was developed by the Paediatric Task Team of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health's Regulatory and Ethics Work Stream to address the question of how we can determine the clinical value of genome-wide sequencing in infants in an intensive care setting. After reviewing available clinical and ethics literature on this question, we conclude that evaluating diagnostic genome-wide sequencing as a comprehensive scan for major genetic disease (rather than as a large panel of single-gene tests) provides a practical approach to assessing its clinical value in acutely ill infants. Comparing the clinical value of diagnostic genome-wide sequencing to chromosomal microarray analysis, the current evidence-based standard of care, per case of serious genetic disease diagnosed provides a practical means of assessing clinical value. Scientifically rigorous studies of this kind are needed to determine if clinical genome-wide sequencing should be established as a standard of care supported by healthcare systems and insurers for diagnosis of genetic disease in seriously ill newborn infants.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41436-018-0055-z

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [40]National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. 2013. Available at https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/resources/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf-2007975843781. Accessed 27 May 2016. 27905712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friedman, J. M., Bombard, Y., Cornel, M. C., Fernandez, C. V., Junker, A. K., Plon, S. E., Stark, Z., & Knoppers, B. M.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Friedman, Jan M.
Venue
Genetics in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
498-504
ISSN
1098-3600 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2808235019
Cited by
44
References
58
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2
FWCI
4.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genetics in Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Genome Canada
  • Genome British Columbia
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Metabolism and Genetic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
whole genome sequencing, exome sequencing, infants, acute illness, intensive care, clinical value, diagnostic testing, chromosomal microarray analysis, standard of care, health insurance coverage, genomic medicine
MeSH terms
Whole Genome Sequencing, Acute Disease, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Genetic Testing, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Newborn, Diseases, Intensive Care, Neonatal, Penetrance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review