Abstract

BackgroundThe American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)/Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines recommend using variant enrichment among cases as "strong" evidence for pathogenicity per the PS4 criterion. However, quantitative support for PS4 thresholds from real-world Mendelian case–control cohorts is lacking.MethodsTo address this gap, we evaluated and established PS4 thresholds using data from the Chinese Deafness Genetics Consortium. A total of 9,050 variants from 13,845 patients with hearing loss (HL) and 6,570 ancestry-matched controls were analyzed. Positive likelihood ratio and local positive likelihood ratio values were calculated to determine the thresholds corresponding to each strength of evidence across three variant subsets.ResultsIn subset 1, consisting of variants present in both cases and controls with an allele frequency (AF) in cases ≥ 0.0005, an odds ratio (OR) ≥ 6 achieved strong evidence, while OR ≥ 3 represented moderate evidence. For subset 2, which encompassed variants present in both cases and controls with a case AF < 0.0005, and subset 3, comprising variants found only in cases and absent from controls, we defined the PS4_Supporting threshold (OR > 2.27 or allele count ≥ 3) and the PS4_Moderate threshold (allele count ≥ 6), respectively. Reanalysis applying the adjusted PS4 criteria changed the classification of 15 variants and enabled diagnosis of an additional four patients.ConclusionsOur study quantified evidence strength thresholds for variant enrichment in genetic HL cases, highlighting the importance of defining disease/gene-specific thresholds to improve the precision and accuracy of clinical genetic testing.

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.