Literature DB >> 31896933

The Somatic Curation and Interpretation Across Laboratories (SOCIAL) project-current state of solid-tumour variant interpretation for molecular pathology in Canada.

T Spence1,2, M A Sukhai1,2, S Kamel-Reid1,2,3, T L Stockley1,2,3.   

Abstract

Background: Practices in somatic variant interpretation and classification vary between Canadian clinical molecular diagnostic laboratories, and understanding of current practices and perspectives is limited. To define gaps and future directions, including consensus guideline development, the Somatic Curation and Interpretation Across Laboratories (social) project examined the present state of somatic variant interpretation in Canadian molecular laboratories, including testing volumes and methods, data sources and evidence criteria, and application of published classification guidelines.
Methods: Individuals who perform somatic variant interpretation in Canadian centres were invited to participate in an online survey. Invitees included laboratory directors (certified as Fellows of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists or the American College of Medical Geneticists), md or md and phd molecular pathologists, and other phd experts, including phd specialists in variant annotation or bioinformatics. Current testing methods, volumes, and platforms in next-generation sequencing, use of variant annotation resources and evidence criteria, and preference for variant classification schemes were evaluated.
Results: Responses were received from 37 participants in 8 provinces. A somatic variant classification scheme jointly supported by the Association for Molecular Pathology (amp), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (asco), and the College of American Pathologists (cap) was used by 47% of respondents; an alternative guideline or a combination of published guidelines was used by 35% of respondents. The remaining 18% did not use a published scheme. Only 41% of respondents used a published scheme without alteration. Although all respondents indicated that there is a need for Canadian laboratories to adopt a somatic variant classification guideline, only 38% of respondents felt that it should be mandatory to adopt the amp/asco/cap-endorsed guideline. Conclusions: Data from the social project identified high variability in current practice, yet strong support for standardization of solid-tumour somatic variant interpretation across Canadian institutions. Aligning classification methods will reduce variation in cross-institutional classification and reporting practices, aiding in consistent practice nationwide. 2019 Multimed Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Classification guidelines; classification schemes; national surveys; solid tumours; somatic variant interpretation; variant annotation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31896933      PMCID: PMC6927784          DOI: 10.3747/co.26.5281

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  9 in total

Review 1.  Prioritizing targets for precision cancer medicine.

Authors:  F Andre; E Mardis; M Salm; J-C Soria; L L Siu; C Swanton
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  A Canadian guideline on the use of next-generation sequencing in oncology.

Authors:  S Yip; A Christofides; S Banerji; M R Downes; I Izevbaye; B Lo; A MacMillan; J McCuaig; T Stockley; G M Yousef; A Spatz
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 3.  A decision support framework for genomically informed investigational cancer therapy.

Authors:  Funda Meric-Bernstam; Amber Johnson; Vijaykumar Holla; Ann Marie Bailey; Lauren Brusco; Ken Chen; Mark Routbort; Keyur P Patel; Jia Zeng; Scott Kopetz; Michael A Davies; Sarina A Piha-Paul; David S Hong; Agda Karina Eterovic; Apostolia M Tsimberidou; Russell Broaddus; Elmer V Bernstam; Kenna R Shaw; John Mendelsohn; Gordon B Mills
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation and Reporting of Sequence Variants in Cancer: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and College of American Pathologists.

Authors:  Marilyn M Li; Michael Datto; Eric J Duncavage; Shashikant Kulkarni; Neal I Lindeman; Somak Roy; Apostolia M Tsimberidou; Cindy L Vnencak-Jones; Daynna J Wolff; Anas Younes; Marina N Nikiforova
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 5.568

5.  OncoKB: A Precision Oncology Knowledge Base.

Authors:  Debyani Chakravarty; Jianjiong Gao; Sarah M Phillips; Ritika Kundra; Hongxin Zhang; Jiaojiao Wang; Julia E Rudolph; Rona Yaeger; Tara Soumerai; Moriah H Nissan; Matthew T Chang; Sarat Chandarlapaty; Tiffany A Traina; Paul K Paik; Alan L Ho; Feras M Hantash; Andrew Grupe; Shrujal S Baxi; Margaret K Callahan; Alexandra Snyder; Ping Chi; Daniel Danila; Mrinal Gounder; James J Harding; Matthew D Hellmann; Gopa Iyer; Yelena Janjigian; Thomas Kaley; Douglas A Levine; Maeve Lowery; Antonio Omuro; Michael A Postow; Dana Rathkopf; Alexander N Shoushtari; Neerav Shukla; Martin Voss; Ederlinda Paraiso; Ahmet Zehir; Michael F Berger; Barry S Taylor; Leonard B Saltz; Gregory J Riely; Marc Ladanyi; David M Hyman; José Baselga; Paul Sabbatini; David B Solit; Nikolaus Schultz
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2017-05-16

Review 6.  Defining actionable mutations for oncology therapeutic development.

Authors:  T Hedley Carr; Robert McEwen; Brian Dougherty; Justin H Johnson; Jonathan R Dry; Zhongwu Lai; Zara Ghazoui; Naomi M Laing; Darren R Hodgson; Francisco Cruzalegui; Simon J Hollingsworth; J Carl Barrett
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 60.716

7.  A classification system for clinical relevance of somatic variants identified in molecular profiling of cancer.

Authors:  Mahadeo A Sukhai; Kenneth J Craddock; Mariam Thomas; Aaron R Hansen; Tong Zhang; Lillian Siu; Philippe Bedard; Tracy L Stockley; Suzanne Kamel-Reid
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology.

Authors:  Sue Richards; Nazneen Aziz; Sherri Bale; David Bick; Soma Das; Julie Gastier-Foster; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Elaine Spector; Karl Voelkerding; Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Whole-exome sequencing and clinical interpretation of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples to guide precision cancer medicine.

Authors:  Eliezer M Van Allen; Nikhil Wagle; Petar Stojanov; Danielle L Perrin; Kristian Cibulskis; Sara Marlow; Judit Jane-Valbuena; Dennis C Friedrich; Gregory Kryukov; Scott L Carter; Aaron McKenna; Andrey Sivachenko; Mara Rosenberg; Adam Kiezun; Douglas Voet; Michael Lawrence; Lee T Lichtenstein; Jeff G Gentry; Franklin W Huang; Jennifer Fostel; Deborah Farlow; David Barbie; Leena Gandhi; Eric S Lander; Stacy W Gray; Steven Joffe; Pasi Janne; Judy Garber; Laura MacConaill; Neal Lindeman; Barrett Rollins; Philip Kantoff; Sheila A Fisher; Stacey Gabriel; Gad Getz; Levi A Garraway
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2014-05-18       Impact factor: 53.440

  9 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Practice guidelines for BRCA1/2 tumour testing in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Daria Grafodatskaya; Darren D O'Rielly; Karine Bedard; Darci T Butcher; Christopher J Howlett; Alice Lytwyn; Elizabeth McCready; Jillian Parboosingh; Elizabeth L Spriggs; Andrea K Vaags; Tracy L Stockley
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 5.941

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.