Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University in St. Louis, MO, United States of America.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America.
Mol Genet Metab. 2024 Sep-Oct;143(1-2):108572. doi: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2024.108572. Epub 2024 Sep 5.
Diseases caused by lysosomal dysfunction often exhibit multisystemic involvement, resulting in substantial morbidity and mortality. Ensuring accurate diagnoses for individuals with lysosomal diseases (LD) is of great importance, especially with the increasing prominence of genetic testing as a primary diagnostic method. As the list of genes associated with LD continues to expand due to the use of more comprehensive tests such as exome and genome sequencing, it is imperative to understand the clinical validity of the genes, as well as identify appropriate genes for inclusion in multi-gene testing and sequencing panels. The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) works to determine the clinical importance of genes and variants to support precision medicine. As part of this work, ClinGen has developed a semi-quantitative framework to assess the strength of evidence for the role of a gene in a disease. Given the diversity in gene composition across LD panels offered by various laboratories and the evolving comprehension of genetic variants affecting secondary lysosomal functions, we developed a scoring system to define LD (Lysosomal Disease Scoring System - LDSS). This system sought to aid in the prioritization of genes for clinical validity curation and assess their suitability for LD-targeted sequencing panels.
Through literature review encompassing terms associated with both classically designated LD and LFRD, we identified 14 criteria grouped into "Overall Definition," "Phenotype," and "Pathophysiology." These criteria included concepts such as the "accumulation of undigested or partially digested macromolecules within the lysosome" and being "associated with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations impacting multiple organs and systems." The criteria, along with their respective weighted values, underwent refinement through expert panel evaluation differentiating them between "major" and "minor" criteria. Subsequently, the LDSS underwent validation on 12 widely acknowledged LD and was later tested by applying these criteria to the Lysosomal Disease Network's (LDN) official Gene List.
The final LDSS comprised 4 major criteria and 10 minor criteria, with a cutoff of 2 major or 1 major and 3 minor criteria established to define LD. Interestingly, when applied to both the LDN list and a comprehensive gene list encompassing genes included in clinical panels and published as LFRD genes, we identified four genes (GRN, SLC29A3, CLN7 and VPS33A) absent from the LDN list, that were deemed associated with LD. Conversely, a subset of non-classic genes included in the LDN list, such as MTOR, OCRL, and SLC9A6, received lower LDSS scores for their associated disease entities. While these genes may not be suitable for inclusion in clinical LD multi-gene panels, they could be considered for inclusion on other, non-LD gene panels.
The LDSS offers a systematic approach to prioritize genes for clinical validity assessment. By identifying genes with high scores on the LDSS, this method enhanced the efficiency of gene curation by the ClinGen LD GCEP.
The LDSS not only serves as a tool for gene prioritization prior to clinical validity curation, but also contributes to the ongoing discussion on the definition of LD. Moreover, the LDSS provides a flexible framework adaptable to future discoveries, ensuring its relevance in the ever-expanding landscape of LD research.
溶酶体功能障碍引起的疾病常表现为多系统受累,导致发病率和死亡率较高。确保对患有溶酶体疾病(LD)的个体进行准确诊断非常重要,特别是随着基因检测作为主要诊断方法的日益突出。由于使用外显子组和基因组测序等更全面的测试,与 LD 相关的基因列表不断扩大,因此了解基因的临床有效性以及确定适合纳入多基因测试和测序面板的基因至关重要。临床基因组资源(ClinGen)致力于确定基因和变异对支持精准医学的临床重要性。作为这项工作的一部分,ClinGen 开发了一个半定量框架来评估基因在疾病中作用的证据强度。鉴于不同实验室提供的 LD 面板中基因组成的多样性以及对影响次级溶酶体功能的遗传变异的理解不断发展,我们开发了一个评分系统来定义 LD(溶酶体疾病评分系统 - LDSS)。该系统旨在帮助优先考虑临床有效性(curative)的基因,并评估它们是否适合 LD 靶向测序面板。
通过涵盖与经典指定的 LD 和 LFRD 相关的术语的文献综述,我们确定了 14 个标准,分为“总体定义”、“表型”和“病理生理学”。这些标准包括“未消化或部分消化的大分子在溶酶体内积累”和“与影响多个器官和系统的广泛临床表现相关”等概念。这些标准及其各自的加权值通过专家小组的评估进行了细化,区分了主要和次要标准。随后,LDSS 在 12 种广泛认可的 LD 上进行了验证,后来通过将这些标准应用于溶酶体疾病网络(LDN)的官方基因列表来进行测试。
最终的 LDSS 包括 4 个主要标准和 10 个次要标准,设定了 2 个主要标准或 1 个主要标准和 3 个次要标准的截定点来定义 LD。有趣的是,当将其应用于 LDN 列表和包含在临床面板中并作为 LFRD 基因发表的综合基因列表时,我们确定了四个未包含在 LDN 列表中的基因(GRN、SLC29A3、CLN7 和 VPS33A),它们被认为与 LD 有关。相反,LDN 列表中包含的一些非经典基因,如 MTOR、OCRL 和 SLC9A6,由于其相关疾病实体而获得较低的 LDSS 评分。虽然这些基因可能不适合纳入临床 LD 多基因面板,但它们可以考虑纳入其他非 LD 基因面板。
LDSS 为优先考虑基因进行临床有效性评估提供了一种系统方法。通过确定 LDSS 得分较高的基因,这种方法提高了 ClinGen LD GCEP 进行基因 curative 的效率。
LDSS 不仅是在进行临床有效性 curative 之前进行基因优先级排序的工具,而且还促进了 LD 的定义的讨论。此外,LDSS 提供了一个灵活的框架,适用于未来的发现,确保了其在不断扩大的 LD 研究领域中的相关性。