↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Whole Exome Sequencing as a Diagnostic Tool: A Pediatric Center’s Experience

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
23 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
161 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
198 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Clinical Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Whole Exome Sequencing as a Diagnostic Tool: A Pediatric Center’s Experience
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fped.2015.00067
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Alexander Valencia, Ammar Husami, Jennifer Holle, Judith A. Johnson, Yaping Qian, Abhinav Mathur, Chao Wei, Subba Rao Indugula, Fanggeng Zou, Haiying Meng, Lijun Wang, Xia Li, Rachel Fisher, Tony Tan, Amber Hogart Begtrup, Kathleen Collins, Katie A. Wusik, Derek Neilson, Thomas Burrow, Elizabeth Schorry, Robert Hopkin, Mehdi Keddache, John Barker Harley, Kenneth M. Kaufman, Kejian Zhang

Abstract

There are limited reports of the use of whole exome sequencing (WES) as a clinical diagnostic tool. Moreover, there are no reports addressing the cost burden associated with genetic tests performed prior to WES. We demonstrate the performance characteristics of WES in a pediatric setting by describing our patient cohort, calculating the diagnostic yield, and detailing the patients for whom clinical management was altered. Moreover, we examined the potential cost-effectiveness of WES by examining the cost burden of diagnostic workups. To determine the clinical utility of our hospital's clinical WES, we performed a retrospective review of the first 40 cases. We utilized dual bioinformatics analyses pipelines based on commercially available software and in-house tools. Of the first 40 clinical cases, we identified genetic defects in 12 (30%) patients, of which 47% of the mutations were previously unreported in the literature. Among the 12 patients with positive findings, seven have autosomal dominant disease and five have autosomal recessive disease. Ninety percent of the cohort opted to receive secondary findings and of those, secondary medical actionable results were returned in three cases. Among these positive cases, there are a number of novel mutations that are being reported here. The diagnostic workup included a significant number of genetic tests with microarray and single-gene sequencing being the most popular tests. Significantly, genetic diagnosis from WES led to altered patient medical management in positive cases. We demonstrate the clinical utility of WES by establishing the clinical diagnostic rate and its impact on medical management in a large pediatric center. The cost-effectiveness of WES was demonstrated by ending the diagnostic odyssey in positive cases. Also, in some cases it may be most cost-effective to directly perform WES. WES provides a unique glimpse into the complexity of genetic disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 190 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 21%
Student > Master 29 15%
Other 26 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Other 37 19%
Unknown 27 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 53 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 52 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 36 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,340,079
of 24,878,531 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#198
of 7,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,104
of 269,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,878,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.