Genetics in MedicineGenetic & Genomic MedicinePeer-reviewed journal article
The landscape of reported VUS in multi-gene panel and genomic testing: Time for a change
Heidi L. RehmiD, Joseph T. AlaimoiD, Swaroop AradhyaiD, Pınar Bayrak‐ToydemiriD, Hunter D. Best, Rhonda C. Brandon, Jillian G. BuchaniD, Elizabeth ChaoiD, Elaine Y. CheniD, Jacob CliffordiD, Ana S.A. CoheniD, Laura Kathleen ConliniD, Soma DasiD, Kyle DavisiD, Daniela del GaudioiD, Florencia Del Viso, Christina DiVincenzo, Marcia T. Eisenberg, Lucia Guidugli, Monia Benhamed HammeriD, Steven M. HarrisoniD, Kathryn E. HatchelliD, Lindsay Havens Dyer, Lily HoangiD, James HoltiD, , Stephen Francis KingsmoreiD
Abstract
PURPOSEVariants of uncertain significance (VUS) are a common result of diagnostic genetic testing and can be difficult to manage with potential misinterpretation and downstream costs, including time investment by clinicians. We investigated the rate of VUS reported on diagnostic testing via multi-gene panels (MGPs) and exome and genome sequencing (ES/GS) to measure the magnitude of uncertain results and explore ways to reduce their potentially detrimental impact. METHODSRates of inconclusive results due to VUS were collected from over 1.5 million sequencing test results from 19 clinical laboratories in North America from 2020 - 2021. RESULTSWe found a lower rate of inconclusive test results due to VUSs from ES/GS (22.5%) compared to MGPs (32.6%; p<0.0001). For MGPs, the rate of inconclusive results correlated with panel size. The use of trios reduced inconclusive rates (18.9% vs 27.6%; p<0.001) whereas the use of GS compared to ES had no impact (22.2% vs 22.6%; p=ns). CONCLUSIONThe high rate of VUS observed in diagnostic MGP testing warrants examining current variant reporting practices. We propose several approaches to reduce reported VUS rates, while directing clinician resources towards important VUS follow-up.
- assay: whole-exome sequencing
- assay: whole-genome sequencing
- research focus: variant calling
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 138
- FWCI
- 23.05
- Field percentile
- top 1%
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
- Enhancing Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Interpretation in Neurogenetics: Collaborative Experiences from a Tertiary Care Centre
Kayla Horowitz, Nellie H. Fotopoulos, … Sali M.K. Farhan·Journal of Medical GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Nov 15, 2024
- Distinct rates of VUS reclassification are observed when subclassifying VUS by evidence level
Gwendolyn Bennett, Izabela Karbassi, … Heidi L. Rehm·Genetics in MedicinePeer-reviewed·Feb 28, 2025
- A panel-agnostic strategy "HiPPo" improves diagnostic efficiency in the UK Genome Medicine Service
Eleanor G. Seaby, Nicholas Simon Thomas, … Sarah Ennis·medRxiv·Jan 31, 2023
- Molecular diagnostic yield of genome sequencing versus targeted gene panel testing in racially and ethnically diverse pediatric patients
Noura S. Abul‐Husn, Priya N. Marathe, … Bruce D. Gelb·Genetics in MedicinePeer-reviewed·May 5, 2023
- From Uncertain to Actionable: Significant Reduction in Variants of Uncertain Significance in Hereditary Germline Testing via Multi-Institutional Real-World Evidence
Kelly M. Schiabor Barrett, Matthew J. Ferber, … Elizabeth T. Cirulli·medRxiv·Aug 12, 2025
- VUSVista: Enhancing the Curation of Variants of Uncertain Significance
Esther Spiteri, Jeanesse Scerri, Jean-Paul Ebejer·bioRxiv·Dec 5, 2025