z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
A Collaborative Effort to Define Classification Criteria forATMVariants in Hereditary Cancer Patients
Author(s) -
Lídia Feliubadaló,
Alejandro MolesFernández,
Marta Santamariña,
Alysson T Sánchez,
Anael López-Novo,
Luz-Marina Porras,
Ana Blanco,
Gabriel Capellà,
Miguel de la Hoya,
Ignacio J. Molina,
Ana Osorio,
Marta Pineda,
Daniel Rueda,
Xavier de la Cruz,
Orland Dı́ez,
Clara Ruíz-Ponte,
Sara GutiérrezEnríquez,
Ana Vega,
Conxi Lázaro
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
clinical chemistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.705
H-Index - 218
eISSN - 1530-8561
pISSN - 0009-9147
DOI - 10.1093/clinchem/hvaa250
Subject(s) - clinical significance , cancer , genomics , medical genetics , relevance (law) , computational biology , gene , bioinformatics , computer science , medicine , genetics , biology , pathology , genome , political science , law
Background Gene panel testing by massive parallel sequencing has increased the diagnostic yield but also the number of variants of uncertain significance. Clinical interpretation of genomic data requires expertise for each gene and disease. Heterozygous ATM pathogenic variants increase the risk of cancer, particularly breast cancer. For this reason, ATM is included in most hereditary cancer panels. It is a large gene, showing a high number of variants, most of them of uncertain significance. Hence, we initiated a collaborative effort to improve and standardize variant classification for the ATM gene. Methods Six independent laboratories collected information from 766 ATM variant carriers harboring 283 different variants. Data were submitted in a consensus template form, variant nomenclature and clinical information were curated, and monthly team conferences were established to review and adapt American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) criteria to ATM, which were used to classify 50 representative variants. Results Amid 283 different variants, 99 appeared more than once, 35 had differences in classification among laboratories. Refinement of ACMG/AMP criteria to ATM involved specification for twenty-one criteria and adjustment of strength for fourteen others. Afterwards, 50 variants carried by 254 index cases were classified with the established framework resulting in a consensus classification for all of them and a reduction in the number of variants of uncertain significance from 58% to 42%. Conclusions Our results highlight the relevance of data sharing and data curation by multidisciplinary experts to achieve improved variant classification that will eventually improve clinical management.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here