Clinical validity assessment of genes frequently tested on intellectual disability/autism sequencing panels.

PURPOSE: Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), such as intellectual disability (ID) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), exhibit genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity, making them difficult to differentiate without a molecular diagnosis. The Clinical Genome Resource Intellectual Disability/Autism Gene Curation Expert Panel (GCEP) uses systematic curation to distinguish ID/ASD genes that are appropriate for clinical testing (ie, with substantial evidence supporting their relationship to disease) from those that are not. METHODS: Using the Clinical Genome Resource gene-disease validity curation framework, the ID/Autism GCEP classified genes frequently included on clinical ID/ASD testing panels as Definitive, Strong, Moderate, Limited, Disputed, Refuted, or No Known Disease Relationship. RESULTS: As of September 2021, 156 gene-disease pairs have been evaluated. Although most (75%) were determined to have definitive roles in NDDs, 22 (14%) genes evaluated had either Limited or Disputed evidence. Such genes are currently not recommended for use in clinical testing owing to the limited ability to assess the effect of identified variants. CONCLUSION: Our understanding of gene-disease relationships evolves over time; new relationships are discovered and previously-held conclusions may be questioned. Without periodic re-examination, inaccurate gene-disease claims may be perpetuated. The ID/Autism GCEP will continue to evaluate these claims to improve diagnosis and clinical care for NDDs.

Evaluating the impact of in silico predictors on clinical variant classification.

PURPOSE: According to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association of Medical Pathology (ACMG/AMP) guidelines, in silico evidence is applied at the supporting strength level for pathogenic (PP3) and benign (BP4) evidence. Although PP3 is commonly used, less is known about the effect of these criteria on variant classification outcomes. METHODS: A total of 727 missense variants curated by Clinical Genome Resource expert groups were analyzed to determine how often PP3 and BP4 were applied and their impact on variant classification. The ACMG/AMP categorical system of variant classification was compared with a quantitative point-based system. The pathogenicity likelihood ratios of REVEL, VEST, FATHMM, and MPC were calibrated using a gold standard set of 237 pathogenic and benign variants (classified independent of the PP3/BP4 criteria). RESULTS: The PP3 and BP4 criteria were applied by Variant Curation Expert Panels to 55% of missense variants. Application of those criteria changed the classification of 15% of missense variants for which either criterion was applied. The point-based system resolved borderline classifications. REVEL and VEST performed best at a strength level consistent with moderate evidence. CONCLUSION: We show that in silico criteria are commonly applied and often affect the final variant classifications. When appropriate thresholds for in silico predictors are established, our results show that PP3 and BP4 can be used at a moderate strength.

Disease-specific ACMG/AMP guidelines improve sequence variant interpretation for hearing loss.

PURPOSE: The ClinGen Variant Curation Expert Panels (VCEPs) provide disease-specific rules for accurate variant interpretation. Using the hearing loss-specific American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) guidelines, the Hearing Loss VCEP (HL VCEP) illustrates the utility of expert specifications in variant interpretation. METHODS: A total of 157 variants across nine HL genes, previously submitted to ClinVar, were curated by the HL VCEP. The curation process involved collecting published and unpublished data for each variant by biocurators, followed by bimonthly meetings of an expert curation subgroup that reviewed all evidence and applied the HL-specific ACMG/AMP guidelines to reach a final classification. RESULTS: Before expert curation, 75% (117/157) of variants had single or multiple variants of uncertain significance (VUS) submissions (17/157) or had conflicting interpretations in ClinVar (100/157). After applying the HL-specific ACMG/AMP guidelines, 24% (4/17) of VUS and 69% (69/100) of discordant variants were resolved into benign (B), likely benign (LB), likely pathogenic (LP), or pathogenic (P). Overall, 70% (109/157) variants had unambiguous classifications (B, LB, LP, P). We quantify the contribution of the HL-specified ACMG/AMP codes to variant classification. CONCLUSION: Expert specification and application of the HL-specific ACMG/AMP guidelines effectively resolved discordant interpretations in ClinVar. This study highlights the utility of ClinGen VCEPs in supporting more consistent clinical variant interpretation.