Large scale multifactorial likelihood quantitative analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants: An ENIGMA resource to support clinical variant classification

Abstract The multifactorial likelihood analysis method has demonstrated utility for quantitative assessment of variant pathogenicity for multiple cancer syndrome genes. Independent data types currently incorporated in the model for assessing BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants include clinically calibrated prior probability of pathogenicity based on variant location and bioinformatic prediction of variant effect, co-segregation, family cancer history profile, co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant in the same gene, breast tumor pathology, and case-control information. Research and clinical data for multifactorial likelihood analysis were collated for 1395 BRCA1/2 predominantly intronic and missense variants, enabling classification based on posterior probability of pathogenicity for 734 variants: 447 variants were classified as (likely) benign, and 94 as (likely) pathogenic; 248 classifications were new or considerably altered relative to ClinVar submissions. Classifications were compared to information not yet included in the likelihood model, and evidence strengths aligned to those recommended for ACMG/AMP classification codes. Altered mRNA splicing or function relative to known non-pathogenic variant controls were moderately to strongly predictive of variant pathogenicity. Variant absence in population datasets provided supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. These findings have direct relevance for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant evaluation, and justify the need for gene-specific calibration of evidence types used for variant classification. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Different measures for auditory hallucinations in populations with psychosis. The Validation of the Spanish versions of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Rating Scale (AVHRS) and the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI)

INTRODUCTION: An updated summary of the most used instruments assessing auditory hallucinations in population with psychosis, allows us to underline the scarceness and need of Spanish versions of important instruments. The aim of the study is to examine the psychometric characteristics of two different and complementary instruments for assessing auditory hallucinations, the Spanish version of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Scale (AVHRS) and the Spanish version of the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 68 patients from four different centres, with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder presenting with auditory hallucinations were included. Apart from the AVHRS and the PUVI, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales-Auditory Hallucinations subscale (PSYRATS-AH) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were also administered to all patients, plus an acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: The Spanish version of the AVHRS showed a good internal consistency, a moderate to high inter-rater reliability, a medium to moderate test-retest reliability, and a good convergent and discriminant validity. The Spanish version of the PUVI showed a good internal consistency and a heterogeneous, but in general moderate, test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish versions of the AVHRS and the PUVI have good psychometric properties and are well accepted among patients