Recommendations for Next-Generation Sequencing Germline Variant Confirmation: A Joint Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology and National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Clinical laboratory implementation of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based constitutional genetic testing has been rapid and widespread. In the absence of widely adopted comprehensive guidance, there remains substantial variability among laboratories in the practice of NGS. One issue of sustained discussion in the field is whether and to what extent orthogonal confirmation of genetic variants identified by NGS is necessary or helpful. The Association for Molecular Pathology Clinical Practice Committee convened the NGS Germline Variant Confirmation Working Group to assess current evidence regarding orthogonal confirmation and to establish recommendations for standardizing orthogonal confirmation practices to support quality patient care. On the basis of the results of a survey of the literature, a survey of laboratory practices, and subject expert matter consensus, eight recommendations are presented, providing a common framework for clinical laboratory professionals to develop or refine individualized laboratory policies and procedures regarding orthogonal confirmation of germline variants detected by NGS.

Clinical Impact of Pathogenic Variants in DNA Damage Repair Genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Breast and Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Consensus guidelines for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer include management recommendations for pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, and other DNA damage repair (DDR) genes beyond BRCA1 or BRCA2. We report on clinical management decisions across three academic medical centers resulting from P/LP findings in DDR genes in breast/ovarian cancer patients. Among 2184 patients, 156 (7.1%) carried a P/LP variant in a DDR gene. Clinical follow-up information was available for 101/156 (64.7%) patients. Genetic test result-based management recommendations were made for 57.8% (n = 59) of patients and for 64.7% (n = 66) of patients' family members. Most recommendations were made for moderate-to-high risk genes and were consistent with guidelines. Sixty-six percent of patients (n = 39/59) implemented recommendations. This study suggests that P/LP variants in DDR genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 can change clinical management recommendations for patients and their family members, facilitate identification of new at-risk carriers, and impact treatment decisions. Additional efforts are needed to improve the implementation rates of genetic-testing-based management recommendations for patients and their family members.

Curated variation benchmarks for challenging medically relevant autosomal genes.

The repetitive nature and complexity of some medically relevant genes poses a challenge for their accurate analysis in a clinical setting. The Genome in a Bottle Consortium has provided variant benchmark sets, but these exclude nearly 400 medically relevant genes due to their repetitiveness or polymorphic complexity. Here, we characterize 273 of these 395 challenging autosomal genes using a haplotype-resolved whole-genome assembly. This curated benchmark reports over 17,000 single-nucleotide variations, 3,600 insertions and deletions and 200 structural variations each for human genome reference GRCh37 and GRCh38 across HG002. We show that false duplications in either GRCh37 or GRCh38 result in reference-specific, missed variants for short- and long-read technologies in medically relevant genes, including CBS, CRYAA and KCNE1. When masking these false duplications, variant recall can improve from 8% to 100%. Forming benchmarks from a haplotype-resolved whole-genome assembly may become a prototype for future benchmarks covering the whole genome.

One in seven pathogenic variants can be challenging to detect by NGS: an analysis of 450,000 patients with implications for clinical sensitivity and genetic test implementation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of technically challenging variants on the implementation, validation, and diagnostic yield of commonly used clinical genetic tests. Such variants include large indels, small copy-number variants (CNVs), complex alterations, and variants in low-complexity or segmentally duplicated regions. METHODS: An interlaboratory pilot study used synthetic specimens to assess detection of challenging variant types by various next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based workflows. One well-performing workflow was further validated and used in clinician-ordered testing of more than 450,000 patients. RESULTS: In the interlaboratory study, only 2 of 13 challenging variants were detected by all 10 workflows, and just 3 workflows detected all 13. Limitations were also observed among 11 less-challenging indels. In clinical testing, 21.6% of patients carried one or more pathogenic variants, of which 13.8% (17,561) were classified as technically challenging. These variants were of diverse types, affecting 556 of 1,217 genes across hereditary cancer, cardiovascular, neurological, pediatric, reproductive carrier screening, and other indicated tests. CONCLUSION: The analytic and clinical sensitivity of NGS workflows can vary considerably, particularly for prevalent, technically challenging variants. This can have important implications for the design and validation of tests (by laboratories) and the selection of tests (by clinicians) for a wide range of clinical indications.

Yield and Utility of Germline Testing Following Tumor Sequencing in Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Both germline genetic testing and tumor DNA sequencing are increasingly used in cancer care. The indications for testing and utility of these 2 tests differ, and guidelines recommend that germline analysis follow tumor sequencing in certain patients to determine whether particular variants are of somatic or germline origin. Broad clinical experience with such follow-up testing has not yet been thoroughly described. Objective: To examine the yield and utility of germline testing following tumor DNA sequencing in a large, diverse patient population. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study examined germline testing through a laboratory supporting multiple academic and community clinics. Participants included 2023 patients with cancer who received germline testing and previously underwent tumor DNA sequencing. These patients received germline testing between January 5, 2015, and January 31, 2020, although most (81% of patients) received testing between January 2, 2018, and January 31, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prevalence of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) was calculated by gene, cancer type, and age at diagnosis. Potential actionability of these findings was determined based on current management guidelines, precision therapy labels, and clinical trial eligibility criteria. Patient records were reviewed to determine whether germline follow-up testing would have been recommended by current guidelines. Results: Among 2023 eligible patients, 1085 were female (53.6%), and the median age at cancer diagnosis was 56 (range, 0-92) years. Pathogenic germline variants were detected in 617 patients (30.5%; 95% CI, 28.5%-32.6%) and were prevalent across patient ages (1-85 years) and cancer types, including cancers known to be strongly associated with germline variance (eg, breast, colorectal) as well as others (eg, renal, lung, and bladder). Many patients (78%-82%) with PGVs met criteria for germline follow-up testing, and 8.1% of PGVs were missed by tumor sequencing. Among those with germline-positive findings, 69 patients (11.2%) had PGVs identified only after presenting with a second primary cancer that possibly could have been detected earlier or prevented given current gene-specific surveillance and risk-reduction recommendations. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that germline analysis following tumor sequencing often produces findings that may impact patient care by influencing systemic therapy choices, surgical decisions, additional cancer screening, and genetic counseling in families. Current guidelines and tumor testing approaches appear to capture many, but not all, of these germline findings, reinforcing the utility of both expanded germline follow-up testing as well as germline analysis independent of tumor sequencing in appropriate patients.

A Rigorous Interlaboratory Examination of the Need to Confirm Next-Generation Sequencing-Detected Variants with an Orthogonal Method in Clinical Genetic Testing.

Orthogonal confirmation of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-detected germline variants is standard practice, although published studies have suggested that confirmation of the highest-quality calls may not always be necessary. The key question is how laboratories can establish criteria that consistently identify those NGS calls that require confirmation. Most prior studies addressing this question have had limitations: they have been generally of small scale, omitted statistical justification, and explored limited aspects of underlying data. The rigorous definition of criteria that separate high-accuracy NGS calls from those that may or may not be true remains a crucial issue. We analyzed five reference samples and over 80,000 patient specimens from two laboratories. Quality metrics were examined for approximately 200,000 NGS calls with orthogonal data, including 1662 false positives. A classification algorithm used these data to identify a battery of criteria that flag 100% of false positives as requiring confirmation (CI lower bound, 98.5% to 99.8%, depending on variant type) while minimizing the number of flagged true positives. These criteria identify false positives that the previously published criteria miss. Sampling analysis showed that smaller data sets resulted in less effective criteria. Our methodology for determining test- and laboratory-specific criteria can be generalized into a practical approach that can be used by laboratories to reduce the cost and time burdens of confirmation without affecting clinical accuracy.

Prevalence and properties of intragenic copy-number variation in Mendelian disease genes.

PURPOSE: We investigated the frequencies and characteristics of intragenic copy-number variants (CNVs) in a deep sampling of disease genes associated with monogenic disorders. METHODS: Subsets of 1507 genes were tested using next-generation sequencing to simultaneously detect sequence variants and CNVs in >143,000 individuals referred for genetic testing. We analyzed CNVs in gene panels for hereditary cancer syndromes and cardiovascular, neurological, or pediatric disorders. RESULTS: Our analysis identified 2844 intragenic CNVs in 384 clinically tested genes. CNVs were observed in 1.9% of the entire cohort but in a disproportionately high fraction (9.8%) of individuals with a clinically significant result. CNVs accounted for 4.7-35% of pathogenic variants, depending on clinical specialty. Distinct patterns existed among CNVs in terms of copy number, location, exons affected, clinical classification, and genes affected. Separately, analysis of de-identified data for 599 genes unrelated to the clinical phenotype yielded 4054 CNVs. Most of these CNVs were novel rare events, present as duplications, and enriched in genes associated with recessive disorders or lacking loss-of-function mutational mechanisms. CONCLUSION: Universal intragenic CNV analysis adds substantial clinical sensitivity to genetic testing. Clinically relevant CNVs have distinct properties that distinguish them from CNVs contributing to normal variation in human disease genes.

Underdiagnosis of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Medicare Patients: Genetic Testing Criteria Miss the Mark.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 5-10% of breast and ovarian cancers are due to hereditary causes such as hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome. Medicare, the third-party payer that covers 44 million patients in the United States, has implemented a set of clinical criteria to determine coverage for the testing of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. These criteria, developed to identify carriers of BRCA1/2 variants, have not been evaluated in the panel testing era. This study investigated a series of Medicare patients undergoing genetic testing for HBOC to determine the efficacy of genetic testing criteria in identifying patients with hereditary risk. METHODS: This study retrospectively examined de-identified data from a consecutive series of Medicare patients undergoing genetic testing based on personal and family history of breast and gynecologic cancer. Ordering clinicians indicated whether patients did or did not meet established criteria for BRCA1/2 genetic testing. The genetic test results were compared between the group that met the criteria and the group that did not. Patients in families with known pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) variants were excluded from the primary analysis. RESULTS: Among 4196 unique Medicare patients, the rate of P/LP variants for the patients who met the criteria for genetic testing was 10.5%, and for those who did not, the rate was 9% (p = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that a substantial number of Medicare patients with clinically actionable genetic variants are being missed by current testing criteria and suggest the need for significant expansion and simplification of the testing criteria for HBOC.

Germline mutation prevalence in individuals with pancreatic cancer and a history of previous malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) cases are attributed to hereditary causes. Individuals with PC and a personal history of another cancer associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) or Lynch syndrome (LS) may be more likely to carry germline mutations. METHODS: Participants with PC and a history of cancer were selected from a pancreatic disease registry. Of 1296 individuals with PC, 149 had a relevant history of cancer. If banked DNA was available, a multigene panel was performed for individuals who had not 1) previously had a mutation identified through clinical testing or 2) undergone clinical multigene panel testing with no mutations detected. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 124 individuals with PC and another HBOC- or LS-related cancer who underwent genetic testing had a mutation identified in a PC susceptibility gene (18%). If prostate cancer is excluded, the mutation prevalence increased to 23% (21/93). Mutation carriers were more likely to have more than 1 previous cancer diagnosis (P = .001), to have had clinical genetic testing (P = .001), and to meet National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) genetic testing criteria (P < .001). Approximately 23% of mutation carriers did not meet NCCN HBOC or LS testing guidelines based on their personal cancer history and reported cancer history in first-degree relatives. CONCLUSION: At least 18% of individuals with PC and a personal history of other HBOC- or LS-related cancers carry mutations in a PC susceptibility gene based on our data, suggesting that criteria for genetic testing in individuals with PC should include consideration of previous cancer history. Cancer 2018;124:1691-700. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Corrigendum: Sources of discordance among germ-line variant classifications in ClinVar.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.60.

Standards and Guidelines for Validating Next-Generation Sequencing Bioinformatics Pipelines: A Joint Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists.

Bioinformatics pipelines are an integral component of next-generation sequencing (NGS). Processing raw sequence data to detect genomic alterations has significant impact on disease management and patient care. Because of the lack of published guidance, there is currently a high degree of variability in how members of the global molecular genetics and pathology community establish and validate bioinformatics pipelines. Improperly developed, validated, and/or monitored pipelines may generate inaccurate results that may have negative consequences for patient care. To address this unmet need, the Association of Molecular Pathology, with organizational representation from the College of American Pathologists and the American Medical Informatics Association, has developed a set of 17 best practice consensus recommendations for the validation of clinical NGS bioinformatics pipelines. Recommendations include practical guidance for laboratories regarding NGS bioinformatics pipeline design, development, and operation, with additional emphasis on the role of a properly trained and qualified molecular professional to achieve optimal NGS testing quality.

Evaluating the contribution of rare variants to type 2 diabetes and related traits using pedigrees.

A major challenge in evaluating the contribution of rare variants to complex disease is identifying enough copies of the rare alleles to permit informative statistical analysis. To investigate the contribution of rare variants to the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and related traits, we performed deep whole-genome analysis of 1,034 members of 20 large Mexican-American families with high prevalence of T2D. If rare variants of large effect accounted for much of the diabetes risk in these families, our experiment was powered to detect association. Using gene expression data on 21,677 transcripts for 643 pedigree members, we identified evidence for large-effect rare-variant cis-expression quantitative trait loci that could not be detected in population studies, validating our approach. However, we did not identify any rare variants of large effect associated with T2D, or the related traits of fasting glucose and insulin, suggesting that large-effect rare variants account for only a modest fraction of the genetic risk of these traits in this sample of families. Reliable identification of large-effect rare variants will require larger samples of extended pedigrees or different study designs that further enrich for such variants.

Consistency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variant Classifications Among Clinical Diagnostic Laboratories.

BACKGROUND: Genetic tests of the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 inform significant clinical decisions for both physicians and patients. Most uncovered variants are benign, and determining which few are pathogenic (disease-causing) is sometimes challenging and can potentially be inconsistent among laboratories. The ClinVar database makes de-identified clinical variant classifications from multiple laboratories publicly available for comparison and review, per recommendations of the American Medical Association (AMA), the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG), the National Society for Genetic Counselors (NSGC), and other organizations. METHODS: Classifications of more than 2000 BRCA1/2 variants in ClinVar representing approximately 22,000 patients were dichotomized as clinically actionable or not actionable and compared across up to seven laboratories. The properties of these variants and classification differences were investigated in detail. RESULTS: Per-variant concordance was 98.5% (CI 97.9%-99.0%). All discordant variants were rare; thus, per patient concordance was estimated to be higher: 99.7%. ClinVar facilitated resolution of many of the discordant variants, and concordance increased to 99.0% per variant and 99.8% per patient when reclassified (but not yet resubmitted) variants and submission errors were addressed. Most of the remaining discordances appeared to involve either legitimate differences in expert judgment regarding particular scientific evidence, or were classifications that predated availability of important scientific evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Significant classification disagreements among the professional clinical laboratories represented in ClinVar are infrequent yet important. The unrestricted sharing of clinical genetic data allows detailed interlaboratory quality control and peer review, as exemplified by this study.

Sources of discordance among germ-line variant classifications in ClinVar.

PurposeClinVar is increasingly used as a resource for both genetic variant interpretation and clinical practice. However, controversies exist regarding the consistency of classifications in ClinVar, and questions remain about how best to use these data. Our study systematically examined ClinVar to identify common sources of discordance and thus inform ongoing practices.MethodsWe analyzed variants that had multiple classifications in ClinVar, excluding benign polymorphisms. Classifications were categorized by potential actionability and pathogenicity. Consensus interpretations were calculated for each variant, and the properties of the discordant outlier classifications were summarized.ResultsOur study included 74,065 classifications of 27,224 unique variants in 1,713 genes. We found that (i) concordance rates differed among clinical areas and variant types; (ii) clinical testing methods had much higher concordance than basic literature curation and research efforts; (iii) older classifications had greater discordance than newer ones; and (iv) low-penetrance variants had particularly high discordance.ConclusionRecent variant classifications from clinical testing laboratories have high overall concordance in many (but not all) clinical areas. ClinVar can be a reliable resource supporting variant interpretation, quality assessment, and clinical practice when factors uncovered in this study are taken into account. Ongoing improvements to ClinVar may make it easier to use, particularly for nonexpert users.

Pathogenic variant burden in the ExAC database: an empirical approach to evaluating population data for clinical variant interpretation.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of a variant in the general population is a key criterion used in the clinical interpretation of sequence variants. With certain exceptions, such as founder mutations, the rarity of a variant is a prerequisite for pathogenicity. However, defining the threshold at which a variant should be considered "too common" is challenging and therefore diagnostic laboratories have typically set conservative allele frequency thresholds. METHODS: Recent publications of large population sequencing data, such as the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database, provide an opportunity to characterize with accuracy and precision the frequency distributions of very rare disease-causing alleles. Allele frequencies of pathogenic variants in ClinVar, as well as variants expected to be pathogenic through the nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) pathway, were analyzed to study the burden of pathogenic variants in 79 genes of clinical importance. RESULTS: Of 1364 BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants that are well characterized as pathogenic or that are expected to lead to NMD, 1350 variants had an allele frequency of less than 0.0025%. The remaining 14 variants were previously published founder mutations. Importantly, we observed no difference in the distributions of pathogenic variants expected to be lead to NMD compared to those that are not. Therefore, we expanded the analysis to examine the distributions of NMD expected variants in 77 additional genes. These 77 genes were selected to represent a broad set of clinical areas, modes of inheritance, and penetrance. Among these variants, most (97.3%) had an allele frequency of less than 0.01%. Furthermore, pathogenic variants with allele frequencies greater than 0.01% were well characterized in publications and included many founder mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The observations made in this study suggest that, with certain caveats, a very low allele frequency threshold can be adopted to more accurately interpret sequence variants.

DATA SHARING AND REPRODUCIBLE CLINICAL GENETIC TESTING: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES.

Open sharing of clinical genetic data promises to both monitor and eventually improve the reproducibility of variant interpretation among clinical testing laboratories. A significant public data resource has been developed by the NIH ClinVar initiative, which includes submissions from hundreds of laboratories and clinics worldwide. We analyzed a subset of ClinVar data focused on specific clinical areas and we find high reproducibility (>90% concordance) among labs, although challenges for the community are clearly identified in this dataset. We further review results for the commonly tested BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which show even higher concordance, although the significant fragmentation of data into different silos presents an ongoing challenge now being addressed by the BRCA Exchange. We encourage all laboratories and clinics to contribute to these important resources.

Germline hemizygous deletion of CDKN2A-CDKN2B locus in a patient presenting with Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a rare cancer predisposition syndrome usually associated with TP53 germline alterations. Its genetic basis in TP53 wild-type pedigrees is less understood. Using whole-genome sequencing, we identified a germline hemizygous deletion ablating CDKN2A-CDKN2B in a TP53 wild-type patient presenting with high-grade sarcoma, laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma and a family history suggestive of LFS. Patient-derived cells demonstrated reduced basal gene and protein expression of the CDKN2A-encoded tumour suppressors p14ARF and p16INK4A with concomitant decrease in p21 and faster cell proliferation, implying potential deregulation of p53-mediated cell cycle control. Review of 13 additional patients with pathogenic CDKN2A variants suggested associations of germline CDKN2A mutations with an expanded spectrum of non-melanoma familial cancers. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a germline gross deletion of the CDKN2A-CDKN2B locus in an LFS family. These findings highlight the potential contribution of germline CDKN2A deletions to cancer predisposition and the importance of interrogating the full extent of CDKN2A locus in clinical testing gene panels.

Clinical Actionability of Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Assessment.

IMPORTANCE: The practice of genetic testing for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer (HBOC) is rapidly evolving owing to the recent introduction of multigene panels. While these tests may identify 40% to 50% more individuals with hereditary cancer gene mutations than does testing for BRCA1/2 alone, whether finding such mutations will alter clinical management is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To define the potential clinical effect of multigene panel testing for HBOC in a clinically representative cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational study of patients seen between 2001 and 2014 in 3 large academic medical centers. We prospectively enrolled 1046 individuals who were appropriate candidates for HBOC evaluation and who lacked BRCA1/2 mutations. INTERVENTIONS: We carried out multigene panel testing on all participants, then determined the clinical actionability, if any, of finding non-BRCA1/2 mutations in these and additional comparable individuals. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We evaluated the likelihood of (1) a posttest management change and (2) an indication for additional familial testing, considering gene-specific consensus management guidelines, gene-associated cancer risks, and personal and family history. RESULTS: Among 1046 study participants, 40 BRCA1/2-negative patients (3.8%; 95% CI, 2.8%-5.2%) harbored deleterious mutations, most commonly in moderate-risk breast and ovarian cancer genes (CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2) and Lynch syndrome genes. Among these and an additional 23 mutation-positive individuals enrolled from our clinics, most of the mutations (92%) were consistent with the spectrum of cancer(s) observed in the patient or family, suggesting that these results are clinically significant. Among all 63 mutation-positive patients, additional disease-specific screening and/or prevention measures beyond those based on personal and family history alone would be considered for most (33 [52%] of 63; 95% CI, 40.3%-64.2%). Furthermore, additional familial testing would be considered for those with first-degree relatives (42 [72%] of 58; 95% CI, 59.8%-82.2%) based on potential management changes for mutation-positive relatives. This clinical effect was not restricted to a few of the tested genes because most identified genes could change clinical management for some patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a clinically representative cohort, multigene panel testing for HBOC risk assessment yielded findings likely to change clinical management for substantially more patients than does BRCA1/2 testing alone. Multigene testing in this setting is likely to alter near-term cancer risk assessment and management recommendations for mutation-affected individuals across a broad spectrum of cancer predisposition genes.

A Systematic Comparison of Traditional and Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Genes in More Than 1000 Patients.

Gene panels for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk assessment are gaining acceptance, even though the clinical utility of these panels is not yet fully defined. Technical questions remain, however, about the performance and clinical interpretation of gene panels in comparison with traditional tests. We tested 1105 individuals using a 29-gene next-generation sequencing panel and observed 100% analytical concordance with traditional and reference data on >750 comparable variants. These 750 variants included technically challenging classes of sequence and copy number variation that together represent a significant fraction (13.4%) of the pathogenic variants observed. For BRCA1 and BRCA2, we also compared variant interpretations in traditional reports to those produced using only non-proprietary resources and following criteria based on recent (2015) guidelines. We observed 99.8% net report concordance, albeit with a slightly higher variant of uncertain significance rate. In 4.5% of BRCA-negative cases, we uncovered pathogenic variants in other genes, which appear clinically relevant. Previously unseen variants requiring interpretation accumulated rapidly, even after 1000 individuals had been tested. We conclude that next-generation sequencing panel testing can provide results highly comparable to traditional testing and can uncover potentially actionable findings that may be otherwise missed. Challenges remain for the broad adoption of panel tests, some of which will be addressed by the accumulation of large public databases of annotated clinical variants.