Where Are We Now? Although only 20% of patients with clubfoot have a known associated genetic syndrome, there is strong evidence suggesting a genetic basis for isolated clubfoot [7]. Approximately 25% of patients with clubfoot have a family member with clubfoot as well [4]. Data from twin studies shows a higher concordance in identical (33%) than fraternal (3%) twins, and more recent data estimate heritability of isolated clubfoot at around 30% [3]. It seems likely that as we continue to investigate this topic, the proportion of patients who have an identifiable genetic cause for having clubfoot—now only about one in five [7]—will increase. Therapeutic opportunities are likely to increase correspondingly. In the current study, Quiggle et al. [6] determine whether there are any shared rare gene variants in unrelated patients with isolated clubfoot, as well as other rare variants of the already identified Filamin B (FLNB) gene in those patients. The authors analyzed whole-exome sequence data obtained from a discovery cohort of 183 unrelated probands with clubfoot and 2492 controls. They filtered their data to identify a candidate deletion that was further genotyped in a replication cohort of unrelated patients with clubfoot. The authors did not find any recurrent variants for any of the known genes causing clubfoot, but they did observe recurrent three-base pair in-frame codon deletion of FLNB in patients with isolated clubfoot. These results are important because identifying individuals in multigenerational families that carry genetic alterations related to nonsyndromic clubfoot, one of the most common congenital musculoskeletal birth defects, could help us determine which patients are at greater risk for recurrence following treatment. Perhaps we can soon anticipate its appearance in siblings or children of people who had clubfoot when they were younger. Where Do We Need To Go? We could build off the results of this study by working toward identifying the genetics of the early limb developmental pathway in clubfoot. This would expand our knowledge on the heritability of isolated clubfoot and help us provide accurate genetic counseling for at-risk families [2]. Additionally, establishing a genetic classification could lead to tailored treatment strategies, which could help researchers potentially identify those patients who are resistant to current treatment modalities. Still, more research is needed to determine the mechanism by which FLNB pathogenic variants may contribute to clubfoot, and in turn, which promoters could potentially trigger those gene alterations. There are already studies that linked DNA oxidative damage in N-acetylation genes to tobacco smoking, although this may not be the case of FLNB, as smoking is a common habit. We could, however, investigate whether FLNB acts as a promoter in patients with clubfoot. How Do We Get There? Animal models, which could serve as analogs to determine the mechanisms by which these genetic abnormalities cause clubfoot, should be on the horizon. Such studies could help us better understand the pathogenesis of early idiopathic clubfoot. Collaborative, multicenter studies with increased sample sizes and harmonizing phenotypes could also potentially determine whether FNLB variants contribute to the development of clubfoot. Determining the inheritance pattern of the disorder [1] could potentially lead to the development of a combined gene alteration/malformation classification. Although certainly a challenging endeavor, this approach could be the final step in the evolution of knowledge in this field.