Lessons learned from expanded reproductive carrier screening in self‐reported Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jewish patients

Background Next‐generation sequencing (NGS)‐based panels have gained traction as a strategy for reproductive carrier screening. Their value for screening Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) individuals, who have benefited greatly from population‐wide targeted testing, as well as Sephardi/Mizrahi Jewish (SMJ) individuals (an underserved population), has not been fully explored. Methods The clinical utilization by 6,805 self‐reported Jewish individuals of an expanded NGS panel, along with several ancillary assays, was assessed retrospectively. Data were extracted for a subset of 96 diseases that, during the panel design phase, were classified as being AJ‐, SMJ‐, or pan‐Jewish/pan‐ethnic‐relevant. Results 64.6% of individuals were identified as carriers of one or more of these 96 diseases. Over 80% of the reported variants would have been missed by following recommended AJ screening guidelines. 10.7% of variants reported for AJs were in “SMJ‐relevant genes,” and 31.2% reported for SMJs were in “AJ‐relevant genes.” Roughly 2.5% of individuals carried a novel, likely pathogenic variant. One in 16 linked cohort couples was identified as a carrier couple for at least one of these 96 diseases. Conclusion For maximal carrier identification, this study supports using expanded NGS panels for individuals of all Jewish backgrounds. This approach can better empower at‐risk couples for reproductive decision making. This retrospective study examines a specific cohort of 6,805 self‐reported Jewish (Ashkenazi/Sephardi/Mizrahi) patients who underwent carrier screening using NGS‐based expanded panels. Results are presented from an extracted set of 96 genes initially classified as “Jewish‐relevant,” albeit that a majority of the patients (79% of cohort) opted for much larger panels that contained this set of 96. The findings highlight the value of large, universal sequence‐based panels, given that (a) self‐reported ethnic information is often unreliable/complex, and (b) many patients want maximal information for their reproductive decision making.