Copy Number Variant Detection by Exome/Genome Sequencing Versus Chromosomal Microarray: A Comparative Study of Over 9,000 Clinical Cases.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42765364.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.gim.2026.102727.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Copy number variants (CNVs) are implicated in many health conditions. Chromosomal microarray (CMA) has traditionally been the first-tier test for CNV detection. However, exome and genome sequencing (ES/GS) can identify CNVs alongside other variant types. This study compared CNV detection using CMA versus ES/GS in a large clinical cohort. CNV calls from CMA and ES/GS were analyzed in a diverse cohort of over 9,000 individuals tested in a high-throughput clinical laboratory. Concordance between platforms was evaluated, with discordant findings reviewed to determine their nature and causes. ES/GS showed >99% concordance with CMA. CMA results not detected on ES/GS were typically CNV <3 exons, CNV outside regions of interest, or low-level mosaicism. Interestingly, 0.68% of cases had a CNV reported by ES/GS only, usually CNVs below the CMA detection limit. The additional CNV detection of CMA after ES/GS was ≤1%. When considering non-CNV findings, the added yield of ES/GS was >41%. ES/GS matched or exceeded CMA performance for CNV detection and identified additional variant types. These findings support the adoption of ES/GS as first-tier tests for CNV detection, streamlining diagnostic workflows, and improving diagnostic rate by capturing both small and large structural variants with high accuracy.