The ClinGen Brain Malformation Variant Curation Expert Panel: Rules for somatic variants in AKT3, MTOR, PIK3CA, and PIK3R2

Assessment of gene-disease associations and recommendations for genetic testing for somatic variants in vascular anomalies by VASCERN-VASCA

BACKGROUND

Vascular anomalies caused by somatic (postzygotic) variants are clinically and genetically heterogeneous diseases with overlapping or distinct entities. The genetic knowledge in this field is rapidly growing, and genetic testing is now part of the diagnostic workup alongside the clinical, radiological and histopathological data. Nonetheless, access to genetic testing is still limited, and there is significant heterogeneity across the approaches used by the diagnostic laboratories, with direct consequences on test sensitivity and accuracy. The clinical utility of genetic testing is expected to increase progressively with improved theragnostics, which will be based on information about the efficacy and safety of the emerging drugs and future molecules. The aim of this study was to make recommendations for optimising and guiding the diagnostic genetic testing for somatic variants in patients with vascular malformations.

RESULTS

Physicians and lab specialists from 11 multidisciplinary European centres for vascular anomalies reviewed the genes identified to date as being involved in non-hereditary vascular malformations, evaluated gene-disease associations, and made recommendations about the technical aspects for identification of low-level mosaicism and variant interpretation. A core list of 24 genes were selected based on the current practices in the participating laboratories, the ISSVA classification and the literature. In total 45 gene-phenotype associations were evaluated: 16 were considered definitive, 16 strong, 3 moderate, 7 limited and 3 with no evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This work provides a detailed evidence-based view of the gene-disease associations in the field of vascular malformations caused by somatic variants. Knowing both the gene-phenotype relationships and the strength of the associations greatly help laboratories in data interpretation and eventually in the clinical diagnosis. This study reflects the state of knowledge as of mid-2023 and will be regularly updated on the VASCERN-VASCA website (VASCERN-VASCA, https://vascern.eu/groupe/vascular-anomalies/ ).

Evaluating ClinGen variant curation expert panels' application of PVS1 code

BACKGROUND

The 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines articulates that the effects of certain types of variants on gene function can often be seen as a complete absence of the gene product by leading to a lack of transcription or nonsense-mediated decay(NMD). However, detailed information considering different types of loss of function(LOF) variants, refined steps assimilating details concerning location of variant, changes in strength levels, NMD boundary, or any additional information pointing to a true null effect, were all left to expert judgement. As part of its Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) initiative, Variant Curation Expert Panels (VCEPs) are designated to make gene/disease-centric specifications in accordance with the ACMG/AMP guidelines, including a more detailed definition of what constitutes an appropriate LOF evidence. Our goal was to evaluate the current LOF guidelines developed by the VCEPs and analyse the prior curated variants concerning the PVS1 criteria, bringing people occupied in genetic data analysis a comprehensive understanding of this code.

METHODS

Our study evaluated 7 VCEPs for their LOF criteria (PVS1). Subsequently, we assessed the predictive criteria by considering the underlying disease mechanism, protein transcript, and variant types delineated. Then, we meticulously curated the LOF evidence referenced by each VCEP in their preliminary variant classification, thereby scrutinizing the recommendations put forth by VCEPs and their application in the interpretation of the aforementioned predictive criteria. Based on these, an extensive curation of evidence summary considering PVS1 applied by VCEPs according to their classification of pilot variants for the purpose of analyzing VCEP criteria specifications and their use in the understanding of LOF was conducted.

RESULTS

We observed in this article that the VCEPs discussed followed the majority of Sequence Variant Interpretation (SVI) recommendations concerning the application of this LOF criteria, except for some disease/gene specific considerations. We highlighted the wide range of PVS1 strength levels approved by VCEP, reflecting the diversity of evidence for each variants type. In addition, we observed substantial differences in the approach used to determine relative strengths for different types of null variants and in the attitude towards these principles concerning variant location, NMD and influence to protein function between VCEPs.

CONCLUSIONS

It is difficult to understand the intricacies of the predictive data(PVS1), which often requires expert-level knowledge of disease/gene. The VCEP criteria specifications for the predictive evidence play an important role in making it more accessible for the curators to apply the predictive data by providing details concerning this complex criteria. Despite this, we believe there is a need for more guidance on standardizing this process and ensuring consistency in the application of this predictive evidence.

Genetic testing in children enrolled in epilepsy surgery program. A real-life study

OBJECTIVE

Although genetic causes of drug-resistant focal epilepsy and selected focal malformations of cortical development (MCD) have been described, a limited number of studies comprehensively analysed genetic diagnoses in patients undergoing pre-surgical evaluation, their outcomes and the effect of genetic diagnosis on surgical strategy.

METHODS

We analysed a prospective cohort of children enrolled in epilepsy surgery program over January 2018-July 2022. The majority of patients underwent germline and/or somatic genetic testing. We searched for predictors of surgical outcome and positive result of germline genetic testing.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were enrolled in epilepsy surgery program and 64 underwent resective epilepsy surgery. We ascertained germline genetic diagnosis in 13/74 patients having underwent germline gene testing (pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in CHRNA4, NPRL3, DEPDC5, FGF12, GRIA2, SZT2, STXBP1) and identified three copy number variants. Thirty-five patients underwent somatic gene testing; we detected 10 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in genes SLC35A2, PTEN, MTOR, DEPDC5, NPRL3. Germline genetic diagnosis was significantly associated with the diagnosis of focal epilepsy with unknown seizure onset.

SIGNIFICANCE

Germline and somatic gene testing can ascertain a definite genetic diagnosis in a significant subgroup of patients in epilepsy surgery programs. Diagnosis of focal genetic epilepsy may tip the scales against the decision to proceed with invasive EEG study or surgical resection; however, selected patients with genetic focal epilepsies associated with MCD may benefit from resective epilepsy surgery and therefore, a genetic diagnosis does not disqualify patients from presurgical evaluation and epilepsy surgery.

Brain somatic mosaicism in epilepsy: Bringing results Back to the clinic

Over the past decade, there has been tremendous progress in understanding brain somatic mosaicism in epilepsy in the research setting. Access to resected brain tissue samples from patients with medically refractory epilepsy undergoing epilepsy surgery has been key to making these discoveries. In this review, we discuss the gap between making discoveries in the research setting and bringing results back to the clinical setting. Current clinical genetic testing mainly uses clinically accessible tissue samples, like blood and saliva, and can detect inherited and de novo germline variants and potentially non-brain-limited mosaic variants that have resulted from post-zygotic mutation (also called "somatic mutations"). Methods developed in the research setting to detect brain-limited mosaic variants using brain tissue samples need to be further translated and validated in the clinical setting, which will allow post-resection brain tissue genetic diagnoses. However, obtaining a genetic diagnosis after surgery for refractory focal epilepsy, when brain tissue samples are available, is arguably "too late" to guide precision management. Emerging methods using cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and subdural electroencephalogram (SEEG) depth electrodes hold promise for establishing genetic diagnoses pre-resection without the need for actual brain tissue. In parallel, development of curation rules for interpreting the pathogenicity of mosaic variants, which have unique considerations compared to germline variants, will assist clinically accredited laboratories and epilepsy geneticists in making genetic diagnoses. Returning results of brain-limited mosaic variants to patients and their families will end their diagnostic odyssey and advance epilepsy precision management.