Premium
Variant classification in precision oncology
Author(s) -
Leichsenring Jonas,
Horak Peter,
Kreutzfeldt Simon,
Heining Christoph,
Christopoulos Petros,
Volckmar AnnaLena,
Neumann Olaf,
Kirchner Martina,
Ploeger Carolin,
Budczies Jan,
Heilig Christoph E.,
Hutter Barbara,
Fröhlich Martina,
Uhrig Sebastian,
Kazdal Daniel,
Allgäuer Michael,
Harms Alexander,
Rempel Eugen,
Lehmann Ulrich,
Thomas Michael,
Pfarr Nicole,
Azoitei Ninel,
Bonzheim Irina,
Marienfeld Ralf,
Möller Peter,
Werner Martin,
Fend Falko,
Boerries Melanie,
Bubnoff Nikolas,
Lassmann Silke,
Longerich Thomas,
Bitzer Michael,
Seufferlein Thomas,
Malek Nisar,
Weichert Wilko,
Schirmacher Peter,
Penzel Roland,
Endris Volker,
Brors Benedikt,
Klauschen Frederick,
Glimm Hanno,
Fröhling Stefan,
Stenzinger Albrecht
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
international journal of cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.475
H-Index - 234
eISSN - 1097-0215
pISSN - 0020-7136
DOI - 10.1002/ijc.32358
Subject(s) - precision oncology , precision medicine , cornerstone , personalized medicine , medical physics , medicine , computational biology , risk stratification , strengths and weaknesses , clinical oncology , clinical practice , bioinformatics , medline , data science , computer science , oncology , cancer , biology , pathology , psychology , family medicine , art , social psychology , biochemistry , visual arts
Next‐generation sequencing has become a cornerstone of therapy guidance in cancer precision medicine and an indispensable research tool in translational oncology. Its rapidly increasing use during the last decade has expanded the options for targeted tumor therapies, and molecular tumor boards have grown accordingly. However, with increasing detection of genetic alterations, their interpretation has become more complex and error‐prone, potentially introducing biases and reducing benefits in clinical practice. To facilitate interdisciplinary discussions of genetic alterations for treatment stratification between pathologists, oncologists, bioinformaticians, genetic counselors and medical scientists in specialized molecular tumor boards, several systems for the classification of variants detected by large‐scale sequencing have been proposed. We review three recent and commonly applied classifications and discuss their individual strengths and weaknesses. Comparison of the classifications underlines the need for a clinically useful and universally applicable variant reporting system, which will be instrumental for efficient decision making based on sequencing analysis in oncology. Integrating these data, we propose a generalizable classification concept featuring a conservative and a more progressive scheme, which can be readily applied in a clinical setting.