Efforts Toward Consensus Variant Interpretation by Commercial Laboratories

Clinical implications of conflicting variant interpretations in the cancer genetics clinic

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the clinical impact of commercial laboratories issuing conflicting classifications of genetic variants.

METHODS

Results from 2000 patients undergoing a multigene hereditary cancer panel by a single laboratory were analyzed. Clinically significant discrepancies between the laboratory-provided test reports and other major commercial laboratories were identified, including differences between pathogenic/likely pathogenic and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) classifications, via review of ClinVar archives. For patients carrying a VUS, clinical documentation was assessed for evidence of provider awareness of the conflict.

RESULTS

Fifty of 975 (5.1%) patients with non-negative results carried a variant with a clinically significant conflict, 19 with a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant reported in APC or MUTYH, and 31 with a VUS reported in CDKN2A, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MUTYH, RAD51C, or TP53. Only 10 of 28 (36%) patients with a VUS with a clinically significant conflict had a documented discussion by a provider about the conflict. Discrepant counseling strategies were used for different patients with the same variant. Among patients with a CDKN2A variant or a monoallelic MUTYH variant, providers were significantly more likely to make recommendations based on the laboratory-reported classification.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the frequency of variant interpretation discrepancies and importance of clinician awareness. Guidance is needed on managing patients with discrepant variants to support accurate risk assessment.

The Science and Art of Clinical Genetic Variant Classification and Its Impact on Test Accuracy

Clinical genetic variant classification science is a growing subspecialty of clinical genetics and genomics. The field's continued improvement is essential for the success of precision medicine in both germline (hereditary) and somatic (oncology) contexts. This review focuses on variant classification for DNA next-generation sequencing tests. We first summarize current limitations in variant discovery and definition, and then describe the current five- and four-tier classification systems outlined in dominant standards and guideline publications for germline and somatic tests, respectively. We then discuss measures of variant classification discordance and the field's bias for positive results, as well as considerations for panel size and population screening in the context of estimates of positive predictive value thatincorporate estimated variant classification imperfections. Finally, we share opinions on the current state of variant classification from some of the authors of the most widely used standards and guideline publications and from other domain experts.

Scaling resolution of variant classification differences in ClinVar between 41 clinical laboratories through an outlier approach

ClinVar provides open access to variant classifications shared from many clinical laboratories. Although most classifications are consistent across laboratories, classification differences exist. To facilitate resolution of classification differences on a large scale, clinical laboratories were encouraged to reassess outlier classifications of variants with medically significant differences (MSDs). Outliers were identified by first comparing ClinVar submissions from 41 clinical laboratories to detect variants with MSDs between the laboratories (650 variants). Next, MSDs were filtered for variants with ≥3 classifications (244 variants), of which 87.6% (213 variants) had a majority consensus in ClinVar, thus allowing for identification of outlier classifications in need of reassessment. Laboratories with outlier classifications were sent a custom report and encouraged to reassess variants. Results were returned for 204 (96%) variants, of which 62.3% (127) were resolved. Of those 127, 64.6% (82) were resolved due to reassessment prompted by this study and 35.4% (45) resolved by a previously completed reassessment. This study demonstrates a scalable approach to classification resolution and capitalizes on the value of data sharing within ClinVar. These activities will help the community move toward more consistent variant classifications, which will improve the care of patients with, or at risk for, genetic disorders.