Abstract A2-38: Interpretation and classification system for somatic variants identified in solid tumor molecular profiling
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Variant classification schemes for clinical laboratory reporting of inherited variants from molecular diagnostic tests for germline conditions have been widely published. These group variants by pathogenicity, distinguishing benign variants from those known or likely to be pathogenic. In contrast, there are no published schemes for somatic variant classification in acquired cancer. Factors such as histology, cancer type and actionability must be considered to determine the variant's clinical significance. We present a somatic variant classification scheme based on our experience in solid tumor molecular profiling using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Our protocol for somatic variant assessment from solid tumor NGS molecular profiling is comprised of: a) Determination of frequency of the variant in population databases, b) Information gathering on the variant from publicly available databases, c) Functional prediction using in silico tools for missense variants, d) Literature searches for publications relevant to variant function and actionability in the context of tumor type. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) principles are applied to determine whether evidence is sufficient to classify a given variant based on actionability. We applied this protocol to classify a pilot set of 258 variants in 158 consecutive patients tested using NGS. We present a classification system to interpret significance of genetic variants in molecular analysis of cancer, utilizing key factors: a) known or predicted pathogenicity of the variant; b) primary site and tumor histology in which the variant is found; c) whether the variant is recurrent in the specific gene; and, d) evidence of clinical actionability for patient management including targeted therapies. We used these factors to develop a 5-category Somatic Variant Classification scheme, for simplified reporting of variant interpretations to treating oncologists. Using this system, we classified 258 variants identified in 158 patients tested using NGS, and evaluated factors impacting the classification. In addition to the subset of findings with known clinical significance (37% of variants), a majority of the findings were potentially clinically actionable by extrapolating from evidence in other tumour types and recurrent variants of the same gene (49%). Classification depended on: Definition of “actionability”; primary tumor site and histology; level and type of evidence available; and, variant frequency. The pathogenicity of a specific gene/variant was distinct from its actionability; although both were indicative of biological relevance, only the latter informed patient management. By focusing on actionability, the SVC attempts to gauge the impact of genomic findings on patient management and care, bringing the most clinically relevant findings to the forefront of a list identified by NGS. Our Somatic Variant Classification scheme uses objective criteria to provide a structured stratification of the clinical significance of a somatic variant in a given histopathology, for a given patient, and for guiding laboratory procedures with respect to reporting. The distinction between “actionability” and “pathogenicity,” and the relevance of the former to the oncology setting, distinguishes our proposed categorization system from previously published classifications. The SVC can be applied to genomic datasets using various detection platforms, to track over time how advances in the field and new knowledge are affecting clinical care. This classification system enables an objective assessment over time of the relationship between available genomic information and the number of actionable findings which may impact patient care. Citation Format: Mahadeo A. Sukhai, Mariam Thomas, Kenneth J. Craddock, Tong Zhang, Tracy L. Stockley, Suzanne Kamel-Reid. Interpretation and classification system for somatic variants identified in solid tumor molecular profiling. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Translation of the Cancer Genome; Feb 7-9, 2015; San Francisco, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(22 Suppl 1):Abstract nr A2-38.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,065 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,019 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».