Cargando…
Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations
Accurate classification of variants in cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) is key for correct estimation of cancer risk and management of patients. Consistency in the weighting assigned to individual elements of evidence has been much improved by the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) 2015 f...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8086256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33208383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107248 |
_version_ | 1783686486568206336 |
---|---|
author | Garrett, Alice Durkie, Miranda Callaway, Alison Burghel, George J Robinson, Rachel Drummond, James Torr, Bethany Cubuk, Cankut Berry, Ian R Wallace, Andrew J Ellard, Sian Eccles, Diana M Tischkowitz, Marc Hanson, Helen Turnbull, Clare |
author_facet | Garrett, Alice Durkie, Miranda Callaway, Alison Burghel, George J Robinson, Rachel Drummond, James Torr, Bethany Cubuk, Cankut Berry, Ian R Wallace, Andrew J Ellard, Sian Eccles, Diana M Tischkowitz, Marc Hanson, Helen Turnbull, Clare |
author_sort | Garrett, Alice |
collection | PubMed |
description | Accurate classification of variants in cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) is key for correct estimation of cancer risk and management of patients. Consistency in the weighting assigned to individual elements of evidence has been much improved by the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) 2015 framework for variant classification, UK Association for Clinical Genomic Science (UK-ACGS) Best Practice Guidelines and subsequent Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK) consensus specification for CSGs. However, considerable inconsistency persists regarding practice in the combination of evidence elements. CanVIG-UK is a national subspecialist multidisciplinary network for cancer susceptibility genomic variant interpretation, comprising clinical scientist and clinical geneticist representation from each of the 25 diagnostic laboratories/clinical genetic units across the UK and Republic of Ireland. Here, we summarise the aggregated evidence elements and combinations possible within different variant classification schemata currently employed for CSGs (ACMG, UK-ACGS, CanVIG-UK and ClinGen gene-specific guidance for PTEN, TP53 and CDH1). We present consensus recommendations from CanVIG-UK regarding (1) consistent scoring for combinations of evidence elements using a validated numerical ‘exponent score’ (2) new combinations of evidence elements constituting likely pathogenic’ and ‘pathogenic’ classification categories, (3) which evidence elements can and cannot be used in combination for specific variant types and (4) classification of variants for which there are evidence elements for both pathogenicity and benignity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8086256 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80862562021-05-14 Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations Garrett, Alice Durkie, Miranda Callaway, Alison Burghel, George J Robinson, Rachel Drummond, James Torr, Bethany Cubuk, Cankut Berry, Ian R Wallace, Andrew J Ellard, Sian Eccles, Diana M Tischkowitz, Marc Hanson, Helen Turnbull, Clare J Med Genet Position Statement Accurate classification of variants in cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) is key for correct estimation of cancer risk and management of patients. Consistency in the weighting assigned to individual elements of evidence has been much improved by the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) 2015 framework for variant classification, UK Association for Clinical Genomic Science (UK-ACGS) Best Practice Guidelines and subsequent Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK) consensus specification for CSGs. However, considerable inconsistency persists regarding practice in the combination of evidence elements. CanVIG-UK is a national subspecialist multidisciplinary network for cancer susceptibility genomic variant interpretation, comprising clinical scientist and clinical geneticist representation from each of the 25 diagnostic laboratories/clinical genetic units across the UK and Republic of Ireland. Here, we summarise the aggregated evidence elements and combinations possible within different variant classification schemata currently employed for CSGs (ACMG, UK-ACGS, CanVIG-UK and ClinGen gene-specific guidance for PTEN, TP53 and CDH1). We present consensus recommendations from CanVIG-UK regarding (1) consistent scoring for combinations of evidence elements using a validated numerical ‘exponent score’ (2) new combinations of evidence elements constituting likely pathogenic’ and ‘pathogenic’ classification categories, (3) which evidence elements can and cannot be used in combination for specific variant types and (4) classification of variants for which there are evidence elements for both pathogenicity and benignity. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-05 2020-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8086256/ /pubmed/33208383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107248 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Position Statement Garrett, Alice Durkie, Miranda Callaway, Alison Burghel, George J Robinson, Rachel Drummond, James Torr, Bethany Cubuk, Cankut Berry, Ian R Wallace, Andrew J Ellard, Sian Eccles, Diana M Tischkowitz, Marc Hanson, Helen Turnbull, Clare Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title | Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title_full | Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title_fullStr | Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title_full_unstemmed | Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title_short | Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations |
title_sort | combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: canvig-uk consensus recommendations |
topic | Position Statement |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8086256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33208383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107248 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garrettalice combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT durkiemiranda combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT callawayalison combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT burghelgeorgej combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT robinsonrachel combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT drummondjames combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT torrbethany combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT cubukcankut combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT berryianr combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT wallaceandrewj combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT ellardsian combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT ecclesdianam combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT tischkowitzmarc combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT hansonhelen combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT turnbullclare combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations AT combiningevidenceforandagainstpathogenicityforvariantsincancersusceptibilitygenescanvigukconsensusrecommendations |