Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGarrett, A
dc.contributor.authorDurkie, M
dc.contributor.authorCallaway, A
dc.contributor.authorBurghel, GJ
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, R
dc.contributor.authorDrummond, J
dc.contributor.authorTorr, B
dc.contributor.authorCubuk, C
dc.contributor.authorBerry, IR
dc.contributor.authorWallace, AJ
dc.contributor.authorEllard, S
dc.contributor.authorEccles, DM
dc.contributor.authorTischkowitz, M
dc.contributor.authorHanson, H
dc.contributor.authorTurnbull, C
dc.contributor.authorCanVIG-UK
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-30T15:57:13Z
dc.date.available2020-08-13
dc.date.available2020-11-30T15:57:13Z
dc.date.issued2020-11-18
dc.identifier.citationGarrett A, Durkie M, Callaway A, et al. J Med Genet Epub ahead of print: [please include Day Month Year]. doi:10.1136/ jmedgenet-2020-107248en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/68814
dc.description.abstractAccurate 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.en_US
dc.languageeng
dc.relation.ispartofJ Med Genet
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectgenetic testingen_US
dc.subjectgenetic variationen_US
dc.subjectgeneticsen_US
dc.subjectgenomicsen_US
dc.subjectmedicalen_US
dc.titleCombining evidence for and against pathogenicity for variants in cancer susceptibility genes: CanVIG-UK consensus recommendations.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.holder© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107248
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33208383en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-08-13
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license