NCT03287206

Brief Summary

Intellectual deficiency (ID) is a veritable public health issue because it affects 1 to 3% of the population at large. Currently, in France, the diagnosis is based on clinical expertise, the use of DNA microarray analysis, screening for fragile-X syndrome and, if necessary, a study of target genes depending on the clinical data. Although clinical expertise is not enough to target one gene in particular, these different tools currently lead to diagnosis in only 20% of patients on average (higher percentage in cases of syndromic intellectual deficiency), sometimes after numerous expensive biological examinations. Thanks to high-throughput sequencing (HTS), medical genetics is experiencing a major technological upheaval, originating from the development of sequencing panels of target genes, such as, for example, the DI459 panel, composed of 459 genes implicated in or likely to be implicated in ID, developed by the team in Strasbourg and whole-exome sequencing (WES). The deployment of HTS in diagnosis has occurred at different speeds depending on the country, some of which have been using it in routine diagnosis for several years. The type of strategy to adopt in development anomalies is still a matter of debate in France, in the absence of results from cost-effectiveness analyses; this absence has hampered the implementation of these technologies. In the diagnosis of ID, the DI459 panel has a diagnostic yield of 25%. Data in the literature also show a high efficacy of WES in patients with ID: approximately 32% of genetic diagnoses (progressively increasing thanks to possible reanalysis as knowledge of genomics advances) and 10% of additional diagnoses through the identification of chromosomal micro-rearrangements, making an expected total of 42% of diagnoses. WES could thus replace array-CGH. The cost is higher than that for the DI44 and DI459 panels, but it means that examinations don't have to be repeated sequentially over time if the investigations are negative. The question of medico-economic value is thus central so as to determine which strategy is the most effective. A few medico-economic studies, comparing classical investigations with WES, have already been carried out concerning the use of HTS for diagnostic purposes, but none have concerned ID, or compared panel sequencing with WES. In this context, a medico-economic study is essential in France, because ultimately the choice of the most appropriate HTS strategy in the diagnosis of ID will have major repercussions not only clinical and economic, but also for society at large, on the one hand because of the benefits 1) for the management and prognosis of patients, and 2) for families as they will have improved access to genetic counselling. It is important to note that the Genetic community has never experienced such a huge technological innovation, which will lead to a massive increase in diagnostic yield, thus justifying the interest that the community must give to this innovation.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
337

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for all trials

Timeline
Completed

Started Jun 2017

Longer than P75 for all trials

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

June 28, 2017

Completed
2 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

August 22, 2017

Completed
28 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

September 19, 2017

Completed
1.3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 27, 2018

Completed
5 years until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

December 16, 2023

Completed
Last Updated

March 19, 2024

Status Verified

March 1, 2024

Enrollment Period

1.5 years

First QC Date

August 22, 2017

Last Update Submit

March 18, 2024

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the strategy "screening for fragile-X syndrome + WES" compared with the strategy "ArrayCGH + screening for fragile-X syndrome + DI459 panel"

    through study completion, an average of 2 years

Interventions

CGH array, Fragile-X syndrome screening, DI459 panel, WES

secondary controls for children's analyses

Eligibility Criteria

Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsChild (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodProbability Sample
Study Population

patients attending a consultation for intellectual deficiency

You may qualify if:

  • Patients (children and adults) with intellectual deficiency (ID), whatever the degree
  • Absence of a clear clinical diagnosis at the first consultation for the dysmorphology assessment
  • Patients who have never undergone genetic investigations
  • Consent of the patient or his/her legal representative
  • Patient with national health insurance cover
  • Samples available from both parents

You may not qualify if:

  • Pregnant or breast-feeding women
  • Patients presenting learning disorders

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Chu Dijon Bourogne

Dijon, 21000, France

Location

Related Publications (1)

  • Soilly AL, Robert-Viard C, Besse C, Bruel AL, Gerard B, Boland A, Piton A, Duffourd Y, Muller J, Poe C, Jouan T, El Doueiri S, Faivre L, Bacq-Daian D, Isidor B, Genevieve D, Odent S, Philip N, Doco-Fenzy M, Lacombe D, Asensio ML, Deleuze JF, Binquet C; DISSEQ Investigators Group; Thauvin-Robinet C, Lejeune C. Cost of exome analysis in patients with intellectual disability: a micro-costing study in a French setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Apr 21;23(1):386. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09373-z.

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
COHORT
Time Perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

August 22, 2017

First Posted

September 19, 2017

Study Start

June 28, 2017

Primary Completion

December 27, 2018

Study Completion

December 16, 2023

Last Updated

March 19, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-03

Locations