Clinical Validation of Targeted and Untargeted Metabolomics Testing for Genetic Disorders: A 3 Year Comparative Study

Global untargeted metabolomics (GUM) has entered clinical diagnostics for genetic disorders. We compared the clinical utility of GUM with traditional targeted metabolomics (TM) as a screening tool in patients with established genetic disorders and determined the scope of GUM as a discovery tool in p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inScientific reports Vol. 10; no. 1; p. 9382
Main Authors Almontashiri, Naif A. M., Zha, Li, Young, Kim, Law, Terence, Kellogg, Mark D., Bodamer, Olaf A., Peake, Roy W. A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London Nature Publishing Group UK 10.06.2020
Nature Publishing Group
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Global untargeted metabolomics (GUM) has entered clinical diagnostics for genetic disorders. We compared the clinical utility of GUM with traditional targeted metabolomics (TM) as a screening tool in patients with established genetic disorders and determined the scope of GUM as a discovery tool in patients with no diagnosis under investigation. We compared TM and GUM data in 226 patients. The first cohort (n = 87) included patients with confirmed inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) and genetic syndromes; the second cohort (n = 139) included patients without diagnosis who were undergoing evaluation for a genetic disorder. In patients with known disorders (n = 87), GUM performed with a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI: 78–91) compared with TM for the detection of 51 diagnostic metabolites. The diagnostic yield of GUM in patients under evaluation with no established diagnosis (n = 139) was 0.7%. GUM successfully detected the majority of diagnostic compounds associated with known IEMs. The diagnostic yield of both targeted and untargeted metabolomics studies is low when assessing patients with non-specific, neurological phenotypes. GUM shows promise as a validation tool for variants of unknown significance in candidate genes in patients with non-specific phenotypes.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:2045-2322
2045-2322
DOI:10.1038/s41598-020-66401-2