Abstract

Genetic variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUSs) are a common outcome of clinical genetic testing. Locus-specific variant databases (LSDBs) have been established for numerous disease-associated genes as a research tool for the interpretation of genetic sequence variants to facilitate variant interpretation via aggregated data. If LSDBs are to be used for clinical practice, consistent and transparent criteria regarding the deposition and interpretation of variants are vital, as variant classifications are often used to make important and irreversible clinical decisions. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of 2017 consecutive BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic variants identified from 24,650 consecutive patient samples referred to our laboratory to establish an unbiased dataset representative of the types of variants seen in the US patient population, submitted by clinicians and researchers for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. We compared the clinical classifications of these variants among five publicly accessible BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant databases: BIC, ClinVar, HGMD (paid version), LOVD, and the UMD databases. Our results show substantial disparity of variant classifications among publicly accessible databases. Furthermore, it appears that discrepant classifications are not the result of a single outlier but widespread disagreement among databases. This study also shows that databases sometimes favor a clinical classification when current best practice guidelines (ACMG/AMP/CAP) would suggest an uncertain classification. Although LSDBs have been well established for research applications, our results suggest several challenges preclude their wider use in clinical practice.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12687-015-0220-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • The aim of genetic testing is to determine the etiology of a suspected genetic disorder to influence medical management or provide a diagnosis that can guide genetic counseling

  • Locus-specific variant databases (LSDBs) have been well established for research applications, our results suggest several challenges preclude their wider use in clinical practice

  • Our results show substantial disparity of variant classifications among and within publicly accessible variant databases

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The aim of genetic testing is to determine the etiology of a suspected genetic disorder to influence medical management or provide a diagnosis that can guide genetic counseling. In publicly circulated near-final drafts of these guidelines (Lyon et al 2013; Richards et al 2014), the ACMG/AMP/CAP will be recommending a multi-tier classification system, grouping variants based upon perceived risk of disease association: pathogenic, likely pathogenic, benign, likely benign, and variant of uncertain significance. These guidelines will recommend that the reporting of novel sequence variants from a clinical diagnostic laboratory must include a clinical interpretation based on the best data available at the time of testing. Laboratories with additional gene-specific information and expertise can use

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call