Reclassification of Variants Following Renal Genetics Testing: Uncommon Yet Impactful for Diagnosis and Management.

Introduction: Genetic testing is increasingly utilized in nephrology practice, but limited real-world data exist on variant reclassification following renal genetics testing. Methods: A cohort of patients at the Cleveland Clinic Renal Genetics Clinic who underwent genetic testing through clinical laboratories was assessed with their clinical and laboratory data analyzed. Results: Between January 2019 and June 2023, 425 new patients with variable kidney disorders from 413 pedigrees completed genetic testing through 10 clinical laboratories, including 255 (60%) females with median (25th, 75th percentiles) age of 36 (22-54) years. Multigene panel was the most frequently used modality followed by single-gene testing, exome sequencing (ES), chromosomal microarray (CMA), and genome sequencing (GS). At initial report, 52% of patients had ≥1 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) with or without concurrent pathogenic variant(s). Twenty amendments were issued across 19 pedigrees involving 19 variants in 17 genes. The overall variant reclassification rate was 5%, with 63% being upgrades and 32% downgrades. Of the reclassified variants, 79% were initially reported as VUS. The median time-to-amendments from initial reports was 8.4 (4-27) months. Following the variant reclassifications, 60% of the patients received a new diagnosis or a change in diagnosis. Among these, 67% of patients received significant changes in clinical management. Conclusion: Variant reclassification following genetic testing is infrequent but important for diagnosis and management of patients with suspected genetic kidney disease. The majority of variant reclassifications involve VUS and are upgrades in clinically issued amended reports. Further studies are needed to investigate the predictors of such events.

Relevance of next generation sequencing (NGS) data re-analysis in the diagnosis of monogenic diseases leading to organ failure.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, our center started a program to offer genetic diagnosis to patients with kidney and liver monogenic rare conditions, potentially eligible for organ transplantation. We exploited a clinical exome sequencing approach, followed by analyses of in silico gene panels tailored to clinical suspicions, obtaining detection rates in line with what reported in literature. However, a percentage of patients remains without a definitive genetic diagnosis. This work aims to evaluate the utility of NGS data re-analysis for those patients with an inconclusive or negative genetic test at the time of first analysis considering that (i) the advance of alignment and variant calling processes progressively improve the detection rate, limiting false positives and false negatives; (ii) gene panels are periodically updated and (iii) variant annotation may change over time. METHODS: 114 patients, recruited between 2018 and 2020, with an inconclusive or negative NGS report at the time of first analysis, were included in the study. Re-alignment and variant calling of previously generated sequencing raw data were performed using the GenomSys Variant Analyzer software. RESULTS: 21 previously not reported potentially causative variants were identified in 20 patients. In most cases (n = 19), causal variants were retrieved out of the re-classification from likely benign to variants of unknown significance (VUS). In one case, the variant was included because of inclusion in the analysis of a newly disease-associated gene, not present in the original gene panel, and in another one due to the improved data alignment process. Whenever possible, variants were validated with Sanger sequencing and family segregation studies. As of now, 16 out of 20 patients have been analyzed and variants confirmed in 8 patients. Specifically, in two pediatric patients, causative variants were de novo mutations while in the others, the variant was present also in other affected relatives. In the remaining patients, variants were present also in non-affected parents, raising questions on their re-classification. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these data indicate that periodic and systematic re-analysis of negative or inconclusive NGS data reports can lead to new variant identification or reclassification in a small but significant proportion of cases, with benefits for patients' management.

Functional evaluation allows ACMG/AMP-based re-classification of CNGA3 variants associated with achromatopsia.

PURPOSE: CNGA3 encoding the main subunit of the cyclic nucleotide-gated ion channel in cone photoreceptors is one of the major disease-associated genes for achromatopsia. Most CNGA3 variants are missense variants with the majority being functionally uncharacterized and therefore hampering genetic diagnosis. In light of potential gene therapy, objective variant pathogenicity assessment is essential. METHODS: We established a medium-throughput aequorin-based luminescence bioassay allowing mutant CNGA3 channel function assessment via quantification of CNGA3 channel-mediated calcium influx in a cell culture system, thereby enabling American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology-based variant re-classification. RESULTS: We provide functional read-out obtained for 150 yet uncharacterized CNGA3 missense substitutions of which 55 were previously categorized as variants of uncertain significance (VUS) identifying 25 as functionally normal and 125 as functionally abnormal. These data enabled the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/ Association for Molecular Pathology-based variant re-classification of 52/55 VUS as either benign, likely benign, or likely pathogenic reaching a VUS re-classification rate of 94.5%. CONCLUSION: Our aequorin-based bioassay allows functionally ensured clinical variant interpretation for 150 CNGA3 missense variants enabling and supporting VUS re-classification and assuring molecular diagnosis to patients affected by CNGA3-associated achromatopsia, hereby identifying patients eligible for future gene therapy trials on this disease.

ConsCal: A tool to aid medical genetics professionals in consanguineous populations.

Consanguineous populations have a higher frequency of autosomal recessive diseases when compared to the rest of the world. This frequency is high enough that families in these populations may even have multiple autosomal recessive diseases. The recurrence risk calculation for the various combinations becomes increasingly more difficult as more recessive diseases are encountered in a family. Another challenge in these populations is investigating the pathogenicity of a variant by considering its segregation with the phenotype. Consanguinity causes the appearance of many homozygous variants due to the identity by descent phenomenon. As the number of these variants increases, so does the percentage of novel variants that need to be classified using segregation. Furthermore, the complexity of calculating the segregation power increases with the level of inbreeding, and in the case of consanguineous families, their pedigrees tend to be very complex. With the aim of addressing these two challenges using a mathematical algorithm, ConsCal, a tool made to specifically cater to medical genetics professionals working with consanguineous populations, was developed. The user-friendly tool contains two primary functions. It simplifies recurrence risk calculations for any combination of autosomal recessive diseases and analyzes familial segregation data to assign a numerical value to the segregation power of a given variant to aid in its classification. As the use of genomics becomes more widespread, this tool can help address the growing need in calculating recurrence risk and segregation power in consanguineous populations.

Exploring the impact of the reclassification of a hereditary cancer syndrome gene variant: emerging themes from a qualitative study.

The complexity of genetic variant interpretation means that a proportion of individuals who undergo genetic testing for a hereditary cancer syndrome will have their test result reclassified over time. Such a reclassification may involve a clinically significant upgrade or downgrade in pathogenicity, which may have significant implications for medical management. To date, few studies have examined the psychosocial impact of a reclassification in a hereditary cancer syndrome context. To address this gap, semi-structured telephone interviews were performed with eighteen individuals who had a BRCA1, BRCA2 or Lynch syndrome-related (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2) gene variant reclassified. The interviews were analysed utilising an inductive, qualitative approach and emergent themes were identified by thematic analysis. Variable levels of recall amongst participants were found. Common motivations for initial testing included a significant personal and/or family history of cancer and a desire to "find an answer". No individual whose uncertain result was upgraded reported negative psychosocial outcomes; most reported adapting to their reclassified result and appraised their genetic testing experience positively. However, individuals whose likely pathogenic/pathogenic results were downgraded reported feelings of anger, shock and sadness post reclassification, highlighting that additional psychosocial support may be required for some. Genetic counselling issues and recommendations for clinical practice are outlined.

Evaluation of Genetic Testing in a Cohort of Diverse Pediatric Patients in the United States with Congenital Cataracts.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield from prior genetic testing in a 20-year cohort of pediatric patients with congenital cataracts. A retrospective review of patients with congenital cataracts who underwent genetic testing was completed from 2003-2022. The diagnostic yield of the test was determined by variant classification and inheritance pattern. Variants from initial testing underwent reclassification in accordance with ACMG-AMP (American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics-American Association of Molecular Pathology) 2015 or 2020 ACMG CNV guidelines. A total of 95 variants were identified in 52 patients with congenital cataracts (42 bilateral, 10 unilateral); 42 % were White, 37% were Hispanic, 8% were Black, and 6% were Asian. The majority of patients (92%) did not have a family history of congenital cataracts but did have systemic illnesses (77%). Whole exome sequencing and targeted congenital cataract panels showed diagnostic yields of 46.2% and 37.5%, respectively. Microarray had the lowest yield at 11%. Compared to the initial classification, 16% (15 of 92 variants) had discrepant reclassifications. More testing is needed, and an increased focus is warranted in the field of ocular genetics on congenital cataracts, particularly in those with systemic illnesses and no family history, to advance our knowledge of this potentially blinding condition.

How should we address the inevitable harms from non-negligent variant reclassification in predictive genetic testing?

The process of interpreting genetic variants, in which experts use all available evidence to determine whether an identified variant is associated with a current or future disease, is both scientific and nevertheless subjective. In this paper, we summarize the existing evidence that any given variant could be reclassified and that such a reclassification could lead to harm. Furthermore, the racial gap in genetic databases could lead to a higher likelihood of harm for non-white patients. We also review recent legal analyses indicating it is unlikely that an individual who sues for restitution would be successful, especially in the absence of evidence of lab negligence. We then propose a compensation program for medical genetic tests to ensure that individuals who experience demonstrable harm due to a variant reclassification can be made whole financially. We conclude by discussing outstanding questions that must be answered for such a program to be feasible.

A multicenter study of clinical impact of variant of uncertain significance reclassification in breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer susceptibility genes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical interpretation of genetic test results is complicated by variants of uncertain significance (VUS) that have an unknown impact on health but can be clarified through reclassification. There is little empirical evidence regarding VUS reclassification in oncology care settings, including the prevalence and outcomes of reclassification, and racial/ethnic differences. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of persons with and without a personal history of cancer carrying VUS (with or without an accompanying pathogenic or likely pathogenic [P/LP] variant) in breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer predisposition genes seen at four cancer care settings (in Texas, Florida, Ohio, and New Jersey) between 2013 and 2019. RESULTS: In 2715 individuals included in the study, 3261 VUS and 313 P/LP variants were reported; 8.1% of all individuals with VUS experienced reclassifications and rates varied significantly among cancer care settings from 4.81% to 20.19% (overall p < 0.001). Compared to their prevalence in the overall sample, reclassification rates for Black individuals were higher (13.6% vs. 19.0%), whereas the rates for Asian individuals were lower (6.3% vs. 3.5%) and rates for White and Hispanic individuals were proportional. Two-year prevalence of VUS reclassification remained steady between 2014 and 2019. Overall, 11.3% of all reclassified VUS resulted in clinically actionable findings and 4.6% subsequently changed individuals' clinical managements. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this large multisite study suggest that VUS reclassification alters clinical management, has implications for precision cancer prevention, and highlights the need for implementing practices and solutions for efficiently returning reinterpreted genetic test results.

Challenges of variant reinterpretation: Opinions of stakeholders and need for guidelines.

PURPOSE: The knowledge used to classify genetic variants is continually evolving, and the classification can change on the basis of newly available data. Although up-to-date variant classification is essential for clinical management, reproductive planning, and identifying at-risk family members, there is no consistent practice across laboratories or clinicians on how or under what circumstances to perform variant reinterpretation. METHODS: We conducted exploratory focus groups (N = 142) and surveys (N = 1753) with stakeholders involved in the process of variant reinterpretation (laboratory directors, clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, nongenetic providers, and patients/parents) to assess opinions on key issues, including initiation of reinterpretation, variants to report, termination of the responsibility to reinterpret, and concerns about consent, cost, and liability. RESULTS: Stakeholders widely agreed that there should be no fixed termination point to the responsibility to reinterpret a previously reported genetic variant. There were significant concerns about liability and lack of agreement about many logistical aspects of variant reinterpretation. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a need to (1) develop consensus and (2) create transparency and awareness about the roles and responsibilities of parties involved in variant reinterpretation. These data provide a foundation for developing guidelines on variant reinterpretation that can aid in the development of a low-cost, scalable, and accessible approach.

Evolution of germline TP53 variant classification in children with cancer.

Li-Fraumeni syndrome, caused by germline pathogenic variants in TP53, results in susceptibility to multiple cancers. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and reclassification of variants over time pose management concerns given improved survival with cancer surveillance for LFS patients. We describe the experience of TP53 variant reclassification at a pediatric cancer center. METHODS: We reviewed medical records (2010-2019) of 756 patients seen in Texas Children's Cancer Genetics Clinic. We noted initial TP53 classification and any reclassifications. We then classified TP53 variants following ClinGen TP53 variant curation expert panel recommendations using data from ClinVar, medical literature and IARC database. RESULTS: Of 234 patients tested for TP53, 27 (11.5%) reports contained pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants and 7 (3)% contained VUS. By January 2022, 4 of 6 unique VUS and 2 of 16 unique P/LP variants changed interpretations in ClinVar. Reinterpretation of these 4 VUS in ClinVar matched clinical decision at the time of initial report. Applying TP53 VCEP specifications classified 3 VUS to P/LP/benign, and one pathogenic variant to likely benign. CONCLUSIONS: Planned review of variant significance is essential, especially for patients with high probability of LFS.

Automated reanalysis application to assist in detecting novel gene-disease associations after genome sequencing.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate whether a bioinformatics application can streamline genome reanalysis and yield new diagnoses for patients with rare diseases. METHODS: We developed TierUp to identify variants in new disease genes for unresolved rare disease cases recruited to the 100,000 Genomes Project, all of whom underwent genome sequencing. TierUp uses the NHS Genomic Medicine Service bioinformatics infrastructure by securely accessing case details from the Clinical Interpretation Portal application programming interface and by querying the curated PanelApp database for novel gene-disease associations. We applied TierUp to 948 cases, and a subset of variants were reclassified according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association of Molecular Pathology guidelines. RESULTS: A rare form of spondylometaphyseal dysplasia was diagnosed through TierUp reanalysis, and an additional 4 variants have been reported to date. From a total of 564,441 variants across patients, TierUp highlighted 410 variants present in novel disease genes in under 77 minutes, successfully expediting an important reanalysis strategy. CONCLUSION: TierUp supports claims that automation can reduce the time taken to reanalyze variants and increase the diagnostic yield from molecular testing. Clinical services should leverage bioinformatics expertise to develop tools that enable routine reanalysis. In addition, services must also explore the ethical, legal, and health economic considerations raised by automation.

Reanalysis of eMERGE phase III sequence variants in 10,500 participants and infrastructure to support the automated return of knowledge updates.

PURPOSE: The clinical genomics knowledgebase is dynamic with variant classifications changing as newly identified cases, additional population data, and other evidence become available. This is a challenge for the clinical laboratory because of limited resource availability for variant reassessment. METHODS: Throughout the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics phase III program, clinical sites associated with the Mass General Brigham/Broad sequencing center received automated, real-time notifications when reported variants were reclassified. In this study, we summarized the nature of these reclassifications and described the proactive reassessment framework we used for the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics program data set to identify variants most likely to undergo reclassification. RESULTS: Reanalysis of 1855 variants led to the reclassification of 2% (n = 45) of variants, affecting 0.6% (n = 67) of participants. Of these reclassifications, 78% (n = 35) were high-impact changes affecting reportability, with 8 variants downgraded from likely pathogenic/pathogenic to variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and 27 variants upgraded from VUS to likely pathogenic/pathogenic. Most upgraded variants (67%) were initially classified as VUS-Favor Pathogenic, highlighting the benefit of VUS subcategorization. The most common reason for reclassification was new published case data and/or functional evidence. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the importance of periodic sequence variant reevaluation and the need for automated approaches to advance routine implementation of variant reevaluations in clinical practice.

Assessing parental understanding of variant reclassification in pediatric neurology and developmental pediatrics clinics.

Improvements in technology used for genetic testing have yielded an increased numbers of variants that are identified, each with a potential to return uninformative results. While some genetics providers may expect patients to be responsible for staying abreast of updates to their genetic testing results, it is unknown whether patients are even aware of the possibility of variant reclassification. Little research has assessed the comprehension and attitudes of parents of pediatric patients regarding reclassification of variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with parents (n = 15) whose children received a VUS from genetic testing in either the pediatric neurogenetics or developmental pediatrics clinics at Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis, Indiana. Most participants expressed understanding of the uncertainty surrounding their child's VUS test result. However, nearly half of participants shared that they had no prior knowledge of its potential reclassification. When asked whose responsibility it is to keep informed about changes to their child's VUS status, some participants stated that it belonged solely to healthcare providers - a distinctive finding of our study - whereas others felt that it was a joint responsibility between providers and the parents. We additionally found that some patients desire a support group for individuals with VUS. These results provide insight into the importance of pretest genetic counseling and the need for increased social and informational support for parents of children who receive inconclusive genetic testing results. We conclude that relying solely on the patient or guardian to manage uncertain results may be insufficient.

Patient goals, motivations, and attitudes in a patient-driven variant reclassification study.

Family studies to reclassify clinically ascertained variants of uncertain significance (VUS) can impact risk assessment, medical management, and psychological outcomes for patients and their families. There are limited avenues for patients and their families to actively participate in VUS reclassification, and access to family studies at most commercial laboratories is restricted by multiple factors. To explore patient attitudes about participation in family studies for VUS reclassification, we conducted semistructured pre- and post-participation telephone interviews with 38 participants in a family-based VUS reclassification study that utilized a patient-driven approach for family ascertainment and recruitment. Participants had VUS from multigene panel testing performed at multiple clinical laboratories for cancer or other disease risk. Inductive thematic analysis of transcribed interviews highlighted four major themes: (a) Participants' study goals were driven by the desire to resolve uncertainty related to the VUS, (b) Participants had mixed reactions to the VUS reclassification outcomes of the study, (c) Personal, public, and familial knowledge increased through study participation and (d) Participants used study participation to actively cope with the uncertainty of a VUS. As personalized genomic medicine becomes more prevalent, clinicians, clinical laboratories, and researchers could consider creating more opportunities for active partnership with patients and families, who are motivated to contribute data to familial VUS studies.

Variant classification changes over time in BRCA1 and BRCA2.

PURPOSE: To report BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) variant reassessments and reclassifications between 2012 and 2017 at the Advanced Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory (AMDL) in Toronto, Canada, which provides BRCA1/2 testing for patients in Ontario, and to compare AMDL variant classifications with submissions in ClinVar. METHODS: Variants were assessed using a standardized variant assessment tool based on the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology's guidelines and tracked in an in-house database. Variants were shared through the Canadian Open Genetics Repository and submitted to ClinVar for comparison against other laboratories. RESULTS: AMDL identified 1209 BRCA1/2 variants between 2012 and 2017. During this period, 32.9% (398/1209) of variants were reassessed and 12.4% (150/1209) were reclassified. The majority of reclassified variants were downgraded (112/150, 74.7%). Of the reclassified variants, 63.3% (95/150) were reclassified to benign, 20.7% (31/150) to likely benign, 10.0% (15/150) to variant of uncertain significance, 2.0% (3/150) to likely pathogenic, and 4.0% (6/150) to pathogenic. Discordant ClinVar submissions were found for 40.4% (488/1209) of variants. CONCLUSION: BRCA1/2 variants may be reclassified over time. Reclassification presents ethical and practical challenges related to recontacting patients. Data sharing is essential to improve variant interpretation, to help patients receive appropriate care based on their genetic results.

The effects of genomic germline variant reclassification on clinical cancer care.

The last two decades have provided an astounding amount of novel information about the human genome. Translating germline genomic data into clinically actionable findings is reliant on the annotation and laboratory classification of specific variants. Variant classification helps providers and patients determine if genomic findings can inform clinical management. In germline hereditary cancer predisposition testing, variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are routinely misunderstood. By definition, they cannot be classified by the testing laboratory as either problematic mutations or benign variants. Many VUS undergo category reclassifications over time (from months to years after initial classification) as more information is known about normal human genomic diversity, especially among underrepresented minority populations. When VUS are reclassified, it has been shown that they are often downgraded. Likewise, some variants originally thought to be actionable mutations are downgraded to VUS or benign variants. Rarely but importantly, VUS may be reclassified in a manner that increases their initial clinical significance. Here, we discuss the insights gained from the study of variant reclassification. We provide a case series to highlight the potential impact that variant reclassifications can have on individual and family cancer management, risk counseling, and screening.

The impact of variant classification on the clinical management of hereditary cancer syndromes.

PURPOSE: The reclassification of genetic variants poses a significant challenge for laboratories and clinicians. Variant review has resulted in the reclassification of variants of unknown significance as well as the reclassification of previously established pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants. These reclassifications have the potential to alter the clinical management of patients with hereditary cancer syndromes. METHODS: Results were reviewed for 1694 patients seen for hereditary cancer evaluation between August 2012 and May 2017 to determine the frequency and types of variant reclassification. Patients with reclassifications with high potential for impact were monitored for alterations in organ surveillance, prophylactic surgery, and cascade testing. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two variants were reclassified representing 124/1694 (7.3%) patients; 11.3% of reclassifications (16/142) had a high potential for clinical impact with 94% (15/16) altering clinical management of patients with 56% (9/16) changing multiple areas of management. CONCLUSION: While reclassifications are rare, the impact on clinical management is profound. In many cases, patients with downgraded pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants had years of unnecessary organ surveillance and underwent unneeded surgical intervention. In addition, cascade testing misidentified those at risk for developing cancers, thereby altering the management across generations. The frequency and types of alterations to clinical management highlight the need for timely variant reclassification.