Disclaimer: This technical standard is designed primarily as an educational resource for clinical laboratory geneticists to help them provide quality clinical laboratory genetic services. Adherence to this standard is voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. This standard should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinical laboratory geneticist should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinical laboratory geneticists are encouraged to document in the patient's record the rationale for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with this standard. They also are advised to take notice of the date any particular standard was adopted, and to consider other relevant medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date. It also would be prudent to consider whether intellectual property interests may restrict the performance of certain tests and other procedures. Purpose: Copy-number analysis to detect disease-causing losses and gains across the genome is recommended for the evaluation of individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders and/or multiple congenital anomalies, as well as for fetuses with ultrasound abnormalities. In the decade that this analysis has been in widespread clinical use, tremendous strides have been made in understanding the effects of copy-number variants (CNVs) in both affected individuals and the general population. However, continued broad implementation of array and next-generation sequencing-based technologies will expand the types of CNVs encountered in the clinical setting, as well as our understanding of their impact on human health. Methods: To assist clinical laboratories in the classification and reporting of CNVs, irrespective of the technology used to identify them, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics has developed the following professional standards in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) project. Results: This update introduces a quantitative, evidence-based scoring framework; encourages the implementation of the fivetier classification system widely used in sequence variant classification; and recommends "uncoupling" the evidencebased classification of a variant from its potential implications for a particular individual. Conclusion: These professional standards will guide the evaluation of constitutional CNVs and encourage consistency and transparency across clinical laboratories.

Purpose:We report the diagnostic yield of whole-exome sequencing (WES) in 3,040 consecutive cases at a single clinical laboratory.Methods: WES was performed for many different clinical indications and included the proband plus two or more family members in 76% of cases. Results:The overall diagnostic yield of WES was 28.8%. The diagnostic yield was 23.6% in proband-only cases and 31.0% when three family members were analyzed. The highest yield was for patients who had disorders involving hearing (55%, N = 11), vision (47%, N = 60), the skeletal muscle system (40%, N = 43), the skeletal system (39%, N = 54), multiple congenital anomalies (36%, N = 729), skin (32%, N = 31), the central nervous system (31%, N = 1,082), and the cardiovascular system (28%, N = 54). Of 2,091 cases in which secondary findings were analyzed for 56

Purpose:Germ-line testing for panels of cancer genes using next-generation sequencing is becoming more common in clinical care. We report our experience as a clinical laboratory testing both well-established, high-risk cancer genes (e.g., BRCA1/2, MLH1, MSH2) as well as more recently identified cancer genes (e.g., PALB2, BRIP1), many of which have increased but less well-defined penetrance.Genet Med 18 8, 823–832.Methods:Clinical genetic testing was performed on over 10,000 consecutive cases referred for evaluation of germ-line cancer genes, and results were analyzed for frequency of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, and were stratified by testing panel, gene, and clinical history.Genet Med 18 8, 823–832.Results:Overall, a molecular diagnosis was made in 9.0% of patients tested, with the highest yield in the Lynch syndrome/colorectal cancer panel. In patients with breast, ovarian, or colon/stomach cancer, positive yields were 9.7, 13.4, and 14.8%, respectively. Approximately half of the pathogenic variants identified in patients with breast or ovarian cancer were in genes other than BRCA1/2.Genet Med 18 8, 823–832.Conclusion:The high frequency of positive results in a wide range of cancer genes, including those of high penetrance and with clinical care guidelines, underscores both the genetic heterogeneity of hereditary cancer and the usefulness of multigene panels over genetic tests of one or two genes.Genet Med 18 8, 823–832.

Since the discovery of the first gene causing holoprosencephaly (HPE), over 500 patients with mutations in genes associated with non-chromosomal, non-syndromic HPE have been described, with detailed descriptions available in over 300. Comprehensive clinical analysis of these individuals allows examination for the presence of genotype-phenotype correlations. These correlations allow a degree of differentiation between patients with mutations in different HPEassociated genes and for the application of functional studies to determine intragenic correlations. These early correlations are an important advance in the understanding of the clinical aspects of this disease, and in general argue for continued analysis of the genetic and clinical findings of large cohorts of patients with rare diseases in order to better inform both basic biological insight and care and counseling for affected patients and families.