medRxivGenetic & Genomic MedicinePreprint
Mismatch repair gene specifications to the ACMG/AMP classification criteria: Consensus recommendations from the InSiGHT ClinGen Hereditary Colorectal Cancer / Polyposis Variant Curation Expert Panel
John‐Paul PlazzeriD, Finlay MacraeiD, Xiaoyu YiniD, Bryony A. ThompsoniD, Susan Mary FarringtoniD, Lauren B. CurrieiD, Kristina Lagerstedt‐RobinsoniD, Jane Hübertz FrederikseniD, Thomas van Overeem HanseniD, Lise GraverseniD, Ian M. FraylingiD, Kiwamu AkagiiD, Gou YamamotoiD, Fahd Al‐MullaiD, Matthew J. FerberiD, Alexandra MartinsiD, Maurizio GenuardiiD, Maija R.J. Kohonen‐CorishiD, Stéphanie Baert‐DesurmontiD, Amanda B. SpurdleiD, Gabriel CapelláiD, Marta PinedaiD, Michael O. WoodsiD, Lene Juel RasmusseniD, Christopher D. HeineniD, , Andreas LaneriD
Abstract
BackgroundIt is known that gene- and disease-specific evidence domains can potentially improve the capability of the ACMG/AMP classification criteria to categorize pathogenicity for variants. We aimed to include gene-disease-specific clinical, predictive, and functional domain specifications to the ACMG/AMP criteria with respect to MMR genes. MethodsStarting with the original criteria (InSiGHT criteria) developed by the InSiGHT Variant Interpretation Committee, we systematically addressed specifications to the ACMG/AMP criteria to enable more comprehensive pathogenicity assessment within the ClinGen VCEP framework, resulting in an MMR gene-specific ACMG/AMP criteria. ResultsA total of 19 criteria were specified, 9 were considered not applicable and there were 35 variations of strength of the evidence. A pilot set of 48 variants was tested using the new MMR gene-specific ACMG/AMP criteria. Most variants remained unaltered, as compared to the previous InSiGHT criteria; however, an additional four variants of uncertain significance were reclassified to P/LP or LB by the MMR gene-specific ACMG/AMP criteria framework. ConclusionThe MMR gene-specific ACMG/AMP criteria have proven feasible for implementation, are consistent with the original InSiGHT criteria, and enable additional combinations of evidence for variant classification. This study provides a strong foundation for implementing gene-disease-specific knowledge and experience, and could also hold immense potential in a clinical setting.
- research focus: variant effect prediction
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: database / resource
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 7
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Systematic large-scale application of ClinGen InSiGHT APC-specific ACMG/AMP variant classification criteria substantially alleviates the burden of variants of uncertain significance in ClinVar and LOVD databases
Xiaoyu Yin, Marcy E. Richardson, … Stefan Aretz·medRxiv·May 3, 2024
- Evidence-based recommendations for gene-specific ACMG/AMP variant classification from the ClinGen ENIGMA BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variant Curation Expert Panel
Michael T. Parsons, Miguel de la Hoya, … Amanda B. Spurdle·The American Journal of Human GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Aug 13, 2024
- Validation of the ACMG/AMP guidelines-based seven-category variant classification system
Jian‐Min Chen, Emmanuelle Masson, … Claude Férec·medRxiv·Jan 23, 2023
- Pathogenic paralogous variants can be used to apply the ACMG PS1 and PM5 variant interpretation criteria
Tobias Brünger, Alina Ivaniuk, … Dennis Lal·medRxiv·Aug 22, 2023
- Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant curation guidelines for the analysis of germline ATM sequence variants
Marcy E. Richardson, Megan A. Holdren, … Fergus J. Couch·medRxiv·May 28, 2024
- Automating ACMG Variant Classifications With BIAS-2015 v2.0.0: Algorithm Analysis and Benchmark Against the FDA-Approved eRepo Dataset
Christopher Edward Eisenhart, Rachel Brickey, … Vafa Bayat·medRxiv·Feb 23, 2025