Abstract
When deciding on which genes to assess in larger Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) datasets for the molecular genetic diagnosis of intellectual disability (ID), geneticists today have a variety of gene-phenotype databases and expert-curated gene lists available. To quantify their respective completeness, we compare an ID gene selection auto-generated from the Human Phenotype Ontology gene-phenotype association database and expert-curated ID gene lists from three reputable sources (sysID, the DDD consortium and Genomics England) and analyse some of their differences. We give examples of what we regard as genuine gaps (“missing ID genes”) for each of these and conclude that a complementary or consensus approach is needed to maximise diagnostic yield in ID patients. We propose several consensus gene lists with ID-associated genes of different confidence levels.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
