29 research outputs found

    Biallelic inheritance of hypomorphic PKD1 variants is highly prevalent in very early onset polycystic kidney disease

    Get PDF
    Purpose To investigate the prevalence of biallelic PKD1 and PKD2 variants underlying very early onset (VEO) polycystic kidney disease (PKD) in a large international pediatric cohort referred for clinical indications over a 10-year period (2010–2020). Methods All samples were tested by Sanger sequencing and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) of PKD1 and PKD2 genes and/or a next-generation sequencing panel of 15 additional cystic genes including PKHD1 and HNF1B. Two patients underwent exome or genome sequencing. Results Likely causative PKD1 or PKD2 variants were detected in 30 infants with PKD-VEO, 16 of whom presented in utero. Twenty-one of 30 (70%) had two variants with biallelic in trans inheritance confirmed in 16/21, 1 infant had biallelic PKD2 variants, and 2 infants had digenic PKD1/PKD2 variants. There was no known family history of ADPKD in 13 families (43%) and a de novo pathogenic variant was confirmed in 6 families (23%). Conclusion We report a high prevalence of hypomorphic PKD1 variants and likely biallelic disease in infants presenting with PKD-VEO with major implications for reproductive counseling. The diagnostic interpretation and reporting of these variants however remains challenging using current American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) and Association of Clinical Genetic Science (ACGS) variant classification guidelines in PKD-VEO and other diseases affected by similar variants with incomplete penetrance

    Challenges in developing and implementing international best practice guidance for intermediate-risk variants in cancer susceptibility genes:APCc.3920T>A p.(Ile1307Lys) as an exemplar

    Get PDF
    Published version, accepted version, submitted versionRDUH staff can access the full-text of this article by clicking on the 'Additional Link' above and logging in with NHS OpenAthens if prompted

    EMQN best practice guidelines for genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

    Get PDF
    This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer Nature via the DOI in this recordHereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) is a genetic condition associated with increased risk of cancers. The past decade has brought about significant changes to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) diagnostic testing with new treatments, testing methods and strategies, and evolving information on genetic associations. These best practice guidelines have been produced to assist clinical laboratories in effectively addressing the complexities of HBOC testing, while taking into account advancements since the last guidelines were published in 2007. These guidelines summarise cancer risk data from recent studies for the most commonly tested high and moderate risk HBOC genes for laboratories to refer to as a guide. Furthermore, recommendations are provided for somatic and germline testing services with regards to clinical referral, laboratory analyses, variant interpretation, and reporting. The guidelines present recommendations where 'must' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is essential; and 'should' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is highly advised but may not be universally applicable. Recommendations are presented in the form of shaded italicised statements throughout the document, and in the form of a table in supplementary materials (Table S4). Finally, for the purposes of encouraging standardisation and aiding implementation of recommendations, example report wording covering the essential points to be included is provided for the most common HBOC referral and reporting scenarios. These guidelines are aimed primarily at genomic scientists working in diagnostic testing laboratories

    The common PKD1 p.(Ile3167Phe) variant is hypomorphic and associated with very early onset, biallelic polycystic kidney disease

    Get PDF
    Biallelic PKD1 variants, including hypomorphic variants, can cause very early onset polycystic kidney disease (VEO-PKD). A family with unexplained recurrent VEO-PKD and neonatal demise in one dizygotic twin was referred for clinical testing. Further individuals with the putative hypomorphic PKD1 variant, p.(Ile3167Phe), were identified from the UK 100,000 genomes project (100 K), UK Biobank (UKBB), and a review of the literature. We identified a likely pathogenic PKD1 missense paternal variant and the putative hypomorphic PKD1 variant from the unaffected mother in the deceased twin but only the paternal PKD1 variant in the surviving dizygotic twin. Analysis of 100 K cases identified a second family with two siblings with similar biallelic inheritance who presented at birth with VEO-PKD and reached kidney failure in their teens unlike other affected relatives. Finally, a survey of 618 UKBB cases confirmed that adult patients monoallelic for PKD1 p.(Ile3167Phe) had normal kidney function. Our data reveals that p.(Ile3167Phe) is the second most common PKD1 hypomorphic variant identified and is neutral in heterozygosity but is associated with VEO-PKD when inherited in trans with a pathogenic PKD1 variant. Care should be taken to ensure that it is not automatically filtered from sequence data for VEO cases

    Quantifying prediction of pathogenicity for within-codon concordance (PM5) using 7541 functional classifications of BRCA1 and MSH2 missense variants.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: Conditions and thresholds applied for evidence weighting of within-codon concordance (PM5) for pathogenicity vary widely between laboratories and expert groups. Because of the sparseness of available clinical classifications, there is little evidence for variation in practice. METHODS: We used as a truthset 7541 dichotomous functional classifications of BRCA1 and MSH2, spanning 311 codons of BRCA1 and 918 codons of MSH2, generated from large-scale functional assays that have been shown to correlate excellently with clinical classifications. We assessed PM5 at 5 stringencies with incorporation of 8 in silico tools. For each analysis, we quantified a positive likelihood ratio (pLR, true positive rate/false positive rate), the predictive value of PM5-lookup in ClinVar compared with the functional truthset. RESULTS: pLR was 16.3 (10.6-24.9) for variants for which there was exactly 1 additional colocated deleterious variant on ClinVar, and the variant under examination was equally or more damaging when analyzed using BLOSUM62. pLR was 71.5 (37.8-135.3) for variants for which there were 2 or more colocated deleterious ClinVar variants, and the variant under examination was equally or more damaging than at least 1 colocated variant when analyzed using BLOSUM62. CONCLUSION: These analyses support the graded use of PM5, with potential to use it at higher evidence weighting where more stringent criteria are met

    Recommendations for laboratory workflow that better support centralised amalgamation of genomic variant data: findings from CanVIG-UK national molecular laboratory survey.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: National and international amalgamation of genomic data offers opportunity for research and audit, including analyses enabling improved classification of variants of uncertain significance. Review of individual-level data from National Health Service (NHS) testing of cancer susceptibility genes (2002-2023) submitted to the National Disease Registration Service revealed heterogeneity across participating laboratories regarding (1) the structure, quality and completeness of submitted data, and (2) the ease with which that data could be assembled locally for submission. METHODS: In May 2023, we undertook a closed online survey of 51 clinical scientists who provided consensus responses representing all 17 of 17 NHS molecular genetic laboratories in England and Wales which undertake NHS diagnostic analyses of cancer susceptibility genes. The survey included 18 questions relating to 'next-generation sequencing workflow' (11), 'variant classification' (3) and 'phenotypical context' (4). RESULTS: Widely differing processes were reported for transfer of variant data into their local LIMS (Laboratory Information Management System), for the formatting in which the variants are stored in the LIMS and which classes of variants are retained in the local LIMS. Differing local provisions and workflow for variant classifications were also reported, including the resources provided and the mechanisms by which classifications are stored. CONCLUSION: The survey responses illustrate heterogeneous laboratory workflow for preparation of genomic variant data from local LIMS for centralised submission. Workflow is often labour-intensive and inefficient, involving multiple manual steps which introduce opportunities for error. These survey findings and adoption of the concomitant recommendations may support improvement in laboratory dataflows, better facilitating submission of data for central amalgamation

    Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK): an exemplar national subspecialty multidisciplinary network.

    Get PDF
    Advances in technology have led to a massive expansion in the capacity for genomic analysis, with a commensurate fall in costs. The clinical indications for genomic testing have evolved markedly; the volume of clinical sequencing has increased dramatically; and the range of clinical professionals involved in the process has broadened. There is general acceptance that our early dichotomous paradigms of variants being pathogenic-high risk and benign-no risk are overly simplistic. There is increasing recognition that the clinical interpretation of genomic data requires significant expertise in disease-gene-variant associations specific to each disease area. Inaccurate interpretation can lead to clinical mismanagement, inconsistent information within families and misdirection of resources. It is for this reason that 'national subspecialist multidisciplinary meetings' (MDMs) for genomic interpretation have been articulated as key for the new NHS Genomic Medicine Service, of which Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK) is an early exemplar. CanVIG-UK was established in 2017 and now has >100 UK members, including at least one clinical diagnostic scientist and one clinical cancer geneticist from each of the 25 regional molecular genetics laboratories of the UK and Ireland. Through CanVIG-UK, we have established national consensus around variant interpretation for cancer susceptibility genes via monthly national teleconferenced MDMs and collaborative data sharing using a secure online portal. We describe here the activities of CanVIG-UK, including exemplar outputs and feedback from the membership

    Combining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations.

    Get PDF
    Accurate classification of variants in cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) is key for correct estimation of cancer risk and management of patients. Consistency in the weighting assigned to individual elements of evidence has been much improved by the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) 2015 framework for variant classification, UK Association for Clinical Genomic Science (UK-ACGS) Best Practice Guidelines and subsequent Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK) consensus specification for CSGs. However, considerable inconsistency persists regarding practice in the combination of evidence elements. CanVIG-UK is a national subspecialist multidisciplinary network for cancer susceptibility genomic variant interpretation, comprising clinical scientist and clinical geneticist representation from each of the 25 diagnostic laboratories/clinical genetic units across the UK and Republic of Ireland. Here, we summarise the aggregated evidence elements and combinations possible within different variant classification schemata currently employed for CSGs (ACMG, UK-ACGS, CanVIG-UK and ClinGen gene-specific guidance for PTEN, TP53 and CDH1). We present consensus recommendations from CanVIG-UK regarding (1) consistent scoring for combinations of evidence elements using a validated numerical 'exponent score' (2) new combinations of evidence elements constituting likely pathogenic' and 'pathogenic' classification categories, (3) which evidence elements can and cannot be used in combination for specific variant types and (4) classification of variants for which there are evidence elements for both pathogenicity and benignity

    Clinical likelihood ratios and balanced accuracy for 44 in silico tools against multiple large-scale functional assays of cancer susceptibility genes.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: Where multiple in silico tools are concordant, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) framework affords supporting evidence toward pathogenicity or benignity, equivalent to a likelihood ratio of ~2. However, limited availability of "clinical truth sets" and prior use in tool training limits their utility for evaluation of tool performance. METHODS: We created a truth set of 9,436 missense variants classified as deleterious or tolerated in clinically validated high-throughput functional assays for BRCA1, BRCA2, MSH2, PTEN, and TP53 to evaluate predictive performance for 44 recommended/commonly used in silico tools. RESULTS: Over two-thirds of the tool-threshold combinations examined had specificity of 0.7. For Meta-SNP, the equivalent PLR = 42.9 (14.4-406) and NLR = 19.4 (15.6-24.9). CONCLUSION: Against these clinically validated "functional truth sets," there was wide variation in the predictive performance of commonly used in silico tools. Overall, REVEL and Meta-SNP had best balanced accuracy and might potentially be used at stronger evidence weighting than current ACMG/AMP prescription, in particular for predictions of benignity

    Germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene analyses from English NHS regional molecular genomics laboratories 1996–2020: development of a national resource of patient-level genomics laboratory records

    Get PDF
    Objective To describe national patterns of National Health Service (NHS) analysis of mismatch repair (MMR) genes in England using individual-level data submitted to the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS) by the NHS regional molecular genetics laboratories. Design Laboratories submitted individual-level patient data to NDRS against a prescribed data model, including (1) patient identifiers, (2) test episode data, (3) per-gene results and (4) detected sequence variants. Individualised per-laboratory algorithms were designed and applied in NDRS to extract and map the data to the common data model. Laboratory-level MMR activity audit data from the Clinical Molecular Genetics Society/Association of Clinical Genomic Science were used to assess early years’ missing data. Results Individual-level data from patients undergoing NHS MMR germline genetic testing were submitted from all 13 English laboratories performing MMR analyses, comprising in total 16 722 patients (9649 full-gene, 7073 targeted), with the earliest submission from 2000. The NDRS dataset is estimated to comprise >60% of NHS MMR analyses performed since inception of NHS MMR analysis, with complete national data for full-gene analyses for 2016 onwards. Out of 9649 full-gene tests, 2724 had an abnormal result, approximately 70% of which were (likely) pathogenic. Data linkage to the National Cancer Registry demonstrated colorectal cancer was the most frequent cancer type in which full-gene analysis was performed. Conclusion The NDRS MMR dataset is a unique national pan-laboratory amalgamation of individual-level clinical and genomic patient data with pseudonymised identifiers enabling linkage to other national datasets. This growing resource will enable longitudinal research and can form the basis of a live national genomic disease registry. Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request. Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. All summary data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplementary information. Individual level data detailed in this study are held within NHS Digital with access available on application
    corecore