加强神经发育障碍中不确定意义的CNVs的临床决策:评分和分离的相关性(或无用性)。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Jorge Diogo Da Silva, Nuno Maia, Paula Jorge, Vanessa Sousa, Nataliya Tkachenko, Ana Rita Soares
{"title":"加强神经发育障碍中不确定意义的CNVs的临床决策:评分和分离的相关性(或无用性)。","authors":"Jorge Diogo Da Silva, Nuno Maia, Paula Jorge, Vanessa Sousa, Nataliya Tkachenko, Ana Rita Soares","doi":"10.1136/jmg-2024-110144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinicians often deal with copy-number variants of unknown significance (CNVUS) when managing neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). Variant classification is often complemented with textual comments, while the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)/Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) numerical scores are rarely reported. Our aim was to determine if the application of ACMG/ClinGen scoring and inheritance/segregation studies are relevant for the reclassification of CNVUS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrieved 167 CNVUS (112 duplications, 55 heterozygous deletions) from test reports of 141 patients with NDD in a 5-year period. None of those testing reports included ACMG/ClinGen scoring information for the CNVUS. One clinical and one laboratorial geneticist independently applied the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system for CNVs. Final scores/categories were assessed for potential modification when adding inheritance/segregation criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>138 (83%) of the CNVUS retained the VUS classification, 14 (8%) changed to benign and 15 (9%) to (likely) pathogenic. Variants deemed benign (11 duplications, 3 deletions) mostly overlapped with ClinGen-established benign regions or were common in the general population; variants deemed (likely) pathogenic (all deletions) were either associated with unrelated autosomal recessive/later-onset autosomal dominant (AD) conditions, or with an AD NDD phenotype in a single case. Inheritance studies were available for 20 (12%) variants (17 inherited, 3 de novo), and none led to a change in classification. A simulation showed that adding inheritance information would also not change the classification of any other variant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Application of the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system led by itself to reclassification of 17% of VUS, despite a very low increase in diagnostic yield (1/141, 0.7%). Additionally, segregation/inheritance studies in CNVUS were mostly irrelevant in most NDD cases, challenging their routine broad application in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":16237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"298-302"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing clinical decision-making for CNVs of uncertain significance in neurodevelopmental disorders: the relevance (or uselessness) of scoring and segregating.\",\"authors\":\"Jorge Diogo Da Silva, Nuno Maia, Paula Jorge, Vanessa Sousa, Nataliya Tkachenko, Ana Rita Soares\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jmg-2024-110144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinicians often deal with copy-number variants of unknown significance (CNVUS) when managing neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). Variant classification is often complemented with textual comments, while the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)/Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) numerical scores are rarely reported. Our aim was to determine if the application of ACMG/ClinGen scoring and inheritance/segregation studies are relevant for the reclassification of CNVUS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrieved 167 CNVUS (112 duplications, 55 heterozygous deletions) from test reports of 141 patients with NDD in a 5-year period. None of those testing reports included ACMG/ClinGen scoring information for the CNVUS. One clinical and one laboratorial geneticist independently applied the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system for CNVs. Final scores/categories were assessed for potential modification when adding inheritance/segregation criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>138 (83%) of the CNVUS retained the VUS classification, 14 (8%) changed to benign and 15 (9%) to (likely) pathogenic. Variants deemed benign (11 duplications, 3 deletions) mostly overlapped with ClinGen-established benign regions or were common in the general population; variants deemed (likely) pathogenic (all deletions) were either associated with unrelated autosomal recessive/later-onset autosomal dominant (AD) conditions, or with an AD NDD phenotype in a single case. Inheritance studies were available for 20 (12%) variants (17 inherited, 3 de novo), and none led to a change in classification. A simulation showed that adding inheritance information would also not change the classification of any other variant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Application of the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system led by itself to reclassification of 17% of VUS, despite a very low increase in diagnostic yield (1/141, 0.7%). Additionally, segregation/inheritance studies in CNVUS were mostly irrelevant in most NDD cases, challenging their routine broad application in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"298-302\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg-2024-110144\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg-2024-110144","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床医生在处理神经发育障碍(ndd)时经常处理未知意义的拷贝数变异(CNVUS)。变异分类通常附有文本注释,而美国医学遗传学和基因组学学院(ACMG)/临床基因组资源(ClinGen)的数值评分很少报道。我们的目的是确定ACMG/ClinGen评分和遗传/分离研究的应用是否与CNVUS的重新分类相关。方法:从141例NDD患者5年的检测报告中检索167个CNVUS(112个重复,55个杂合缺失)。这些检测报告均未包含CNVUS的ACMG/ClinGen评分信息。一名临床遗传学家和一名实验室遗传学家独立应用ACMG/ClinGen CNVs评分系统。当添加继承/隔离标准时,评估最终分数/类别以进行潜在的修改。结果:138例(83%)CNVUS保留了VUS分类,14例(8%)变为良性,15例(9%)变为(可能的)致病性。良性变异(11个重复,3个缺失)大多与clingen建立的良性区域重叠,或者在一般人群中很常见;被认为(可能)致病的变异(所有缺失)要么与不相关的常染色体隐性/晚发性常染色体显性(AD)疾病相关,要么与单一病例的AD NDD表型相关。20个(12%)变异(17个是遗传的,3个是新生的)的遗传研究,没有导致分类的改变。仿真结果表明,添加继承信息也不会改变任何其他变体的分类。结论:应用ACMG/ClinGen评分系统对17%的VUS进行了重新分类,尽管诊断率的提高非常低(1/ 141,0.7%)。此外,CNVUS的分离/遗传研究在大多数NDD病例中大多不相关,挑战了它们在临床实践中的常规广泛应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhancing clinical decision-making for CNVs of uncertain significance in neurodevelopmental disorders: the relevance (or uselessness) of scoring and segregating.

Background: Clinicians often deal with copy-number variants of unknown significance (CNVUS) when managing neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). Variant classification is often complemented with textual comments, while the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)/Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) numerical scores are rarely reported. Our aim was to determine if the application of ACMG/ClinGen scoring and inheritance/segregation studies are relevant for the reclassification of CNVUS.

Methods: We retrieved 167 CNVUS (112 duplications, 55 heterozygous deletions) from test reports of 141 patients with NDD in a 5-year period. None of those testing reports included ACMG/ClinGen scoring information for the CNVUS. One clinical and one laboratorial geneticist independently applied the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system for CNVs. Final scores/categories were assessed for potential modification when adding inheritance/segregation criteria.

Results: 138 (83%) of the CNVUS retained the VUS classification, 14 (8%) changed to benign and 15 (9%) to (likely) pathogenic. Variants deemed benign (11 duplications, 3 deletions) mostly overlapped with ClinGen-established benign regions or were common in the general population; variants deemed (likely) pathogenic (all deletions) were either associated with unrelated autosomal recessive/later-onset autosomal dominant (AD) conditions, or with an AD NDD phenotype in a single case. Inheritance studies were available for 20 (12%) variants (17 inherited, 3 de novo), and none led to a change in classification. A simulation showed that adding inheritance information would also not change the classification of any other variant.

Conclusion: Application of the ACMG/ClinGen scoring system led by itself to reclassification of 17% of VUS, despite a very low increase in diagnostic yield (1/141, 0.7%). Additionally, segregation/inheritance studies in CNVUS were mostly irrelevant in most NDD cases, challenging their routine broad application in clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Genetics
Journal of Medical Genetics 医学-遗传学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
92
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Genetics is a leading international peer-reviewed journal covering original research in human genetics, including reviews of and opinion on the latest developments. Articles cover the molecular basis of human disease including germline cancer genetics, clinical manifestations of genetic disorders, applications of molecular genetics to medical practice and the systematic evaluation of such applications worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信