Cao, Yang

Context.— Optical genome mapping (OGM) represents a promising cytogenomic technology that detects structural variants, including fusions, rearrangements, copy number variants, and loss of heterozygosity, in a single assay. Unlike karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization, or chromosomal microarray, OGM leverages long-molecule imaging to map the whole genome with high resolution. This positions OGM as a novel tool for constitutional and somatic/cancer genomics. However, its current and planned utilization in clinical and research settings remains unknown, necessitating further investigation. Objective.— To investigate the current utilization of OGM in clinical and research laboratories, assess its applications, and evaluate future utilization strategies. Design.— In 2024, a supplemental questionnaire was incorporated into 6 College of American Pathologists proficiency testing programs to evaluate OGM’s utilization. Results.— Of 921 returned questionnaires, 712 were analyzed after duplicates were removed. Sixty-seven (9.4%) currently offered OGM testing: 5.2% (37) for research only, 1.8% (13) for only clinical use, and 2.4% (17) for both. Future adoption plans showed 7.6% (53 of 700 laboratories) and 7.9% (55 of 700 laboratories) aiming to implement OGM clinically within 12 and 24 months, respectively. The most common applications included hematologic malignancies and constitutional/germline postnatal disorders, followed by prenatal testing. International laboratories demonstrated statistically higher utilization rates than domestic laboratories ( P = .001). Conclusions.— This first survey on OGM clinical utilization reveals its status as a niche technology, with 67 laboratories currently using it. Its primary clinical applications are in constitutional/germline analysis and hematologic malignancies. Although international laboratories led in 2024, 108 laboratories (domestic and international) plan clinical adoption within 24 months, signaling OGM’s potential for broader integration.

Background and Aims: Metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease affects about a third of adults worldwide and is projected soon to be the leading cause of liver cirrhosis. It occurs when fat accumulates in hepatocytes and can progress to metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis, liver cirrhosis, and HCC. Metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease pathogenesis is believed to involve a combination of genetic and environmental risk factors. Single nucleotide polymorphisms have been implicated, but non-syndromic monogenic causes are lacking. Approach and Results: We identified a novel genetic variant in a familial case of metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis and performed deep variant functional analysis, including protein modeling, dynamics, and cell-based assays to assess molecular mechanisms of dysfunction and altered cellular signaling. We analyzed exome sequencing data of 3904 individuals with steatotic liver disease (SLD) to identify additional cases and establish the link between specific gene variants and SLD diagnosis. We discovered and functionally validated the NM_000245.4:c.3505A>T; p.(Ile1169Phe) variant in the MET (mesenchymal-epithelial transition) kinase domain as a monogenic cause of SLD. Subsequently, we detected additional ultra-rare, previously uninterpreted, and likely deleterious variants in MET from screening sequencing data. Among individuals with confirmed SLD based on electronic record review, 1.1% (45/3904) had rare predicted deleterious MET variants. Eight of 45 (17.7%) individuals had predicted deleterious variants in the MET kinase domain confirmed to be functionally like the familial case variant. Conclusions: We report the first germline nonmalignant rare MET -driven disease, a monogenic form of SLD.

Background: The joint College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Cytogenetics Committee works to ensure the competency and proficiency of clinical cytogenetic testing laboratories through proficiency testing (PT) programs for various clinical tests offered by such laboratories, including the evaluation of cytogenetic abnormalities in solid tumors. Methods: Review and analyze 25 years (1999–2023) of solid tumor chromosome analysis PT results, utilizing G-banded karyograms. A retrospective review of results from 1999 to 2023 was performed, identifying the challenges addressing solid tumors. The chromosomal abnormalities and overall performance were evaluated. Results: A total of 21 solid tumor challenges were administered during the period 1999–2018. No solid tumor challenges were administered during the period 2019–2023. Challenges consisted of metaphase images and accompanying clinical history for the evaluation of numerical and/or structural abnormalities. All 21 cases reached 80% grading consensus for abnormality recognition. However, five cases (24%) failed to reach consensus for nomenclature reporting by participating laboratories. These cases illustrate errors in reporting chromosomal abnormalities, including whole-arm translocations and those involving sex chromosomes. In addition, they highlight the challenges with differentiation of terminal and interstitial deletions, difficulties in identifying correct breakpoints, and omission of brackets in neoplastic cases. Conclusions: This comprehensive 25-year review demonstrates the exceptional proficiency of cytogenetic laboratories in accurately identifying chromosome abnormalities in solid tumors, while also highlighting the challenges of reporting specific types of chromosomal abnormalities.