Toxic Tort Genomics
Toxic tort matters increasingly turn on analyzing whether a cancer or other malady in a particular person was caused solely or partially by endogenous (internal) genomic mechanisms, and/or whether a particular toxicant provided a “hit” to DNA. Renovatio Genomics provides the genomic and bioinformatic evidence that provides answers.
Our work is the same regardless of which party retains us: sequence the individual’s genome, characterize the variants and damage signatures present in the individual’s genome data, and compare them against what the published peer-reviewed literature predicts for the alleged exposure.
What we deliver
Comprehensive genomic profiling including whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, RNA-seq transcriptomics, and targeted epigenetic sequencing through CLIA-certified partner laboratories.
Rigorous bioinformatic analysis encompassing variant calling, somatic and germline classification, and mutational signature analysis executed through validated, reproducible pipelines anchored in peer-reviewed reference databases.
Variant impact scoring against curated reference datasets such as ClinVar and the MSKCC variant resources, using quantitative tools including CADD to distinguish high-impact variants from those that are benign or of uncertain significance.
Independent review and interpretation of existing genetic testing results, including assistance acquiring complete underlying data from third-party sequencing providers.
Case triage to identify matters in which genomic evidence is most likely to be informative, before significant sequencing investment is committed.
Genomic input to medical-monitoring strategy, including identification of biomarkers and surveillance approaches scientifically justified for exposed cohorts.
A comprehensive expert-written report translating sequencing findings into a coherent narrative, with explicit identification of supporting and limiting evidence and consideration of alternative causes.
Optional addendum reports, deposition preparation support, and trial testimony under separate engagement.
Where genomic evidence is most useful
When mutational signatures (for example, SBS4 for tobacco, SBS22 for aristolochic acid, ultraviolet-light signatures, or alkylating-agent signatures) can corroborate or rule out a candidate exposure.
When germline predisposition variants can establish or rebut alternative causation arguments, including variants implicated in mesothelioma and other cancers (such as BAP1, TP53).
When transcriptomic or epigenetic shifts can characterize the biological response to a candidate exposure.
What genomic evidence cannot do
Some exposures leave no distinctive molecular signature. Some signatures are non-specific. Where the underlying science does not support an opinion, our reports say so. Renovatio Genomics identifies the limits of the inference as plainly as it identifies the support for it.
Standards
All analyses are designed to support a Daubert/Frye admissibility argument. We do not guarantee admissibility, which is a determination for the court, but methodology, pipeline versions, error rate, and reproducibility are documented in every report.
