Letter to the Editor: “A Unique Case of Metastatic, Functional, Hereditary Paraganglioma Associated With an SDHC Germline Mutation”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several recently published articles (1–5) in Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism report variant interpretation using terms that are no longer encouraged by the standards and guidelines as outlined by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (6). Terms such as “mutation” and “polymorphism” that refer to a permanent change in the nucleotide sequence and a variant with a frequency >1% in the general population, respectively, lead to confusion because of incorrect assumptions of pathogenic and benign effects (6). Thus, in 2015, standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants were created using a five-tier system of classification to design a framework with universal applicability. The term “variant” was preferred to mutation and polymorphism. Variants are further classified into pathogenic, likely pathogenic, variant of uncertain significance (VUS), likely benign, or benign (6). These guidelines have been adopted by many US and international laboratories and journals, requiring substantial expertise to be applied correctly for specific diseases and genes. The fluidity of this classification system allows for reclassification of variants (e.g., from VUS to benign) as new or updated reports with multiple new cases or families, including functional laboratory studies, are released. A recent study that examined hereditary cancer genetic results from >1.5 million individuals using a single-gene or small panel test showed that ∼24.9% of VUSs were reclassified, which included both downgrades and upgrades (7). Thus, we encourage the adoption of this framework by all endocrine journals to assist in the standardization of variant interpretation practices across all Mendelian disorders. variant of uncertain significance. Disclosures Summary: The authors have nothing to disclose.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".