Back

Evolution of the open-access CIViC knowledgebase is driven by the needsof the cancer variant interpretation community

Krysiak, K.; Danos, A. M.; Kiwala, S.; McMichael, J. F.; Coffman, A. C.; Barnell, E. K.; Sheta, L.; Saliba, J.; Grisdale, C. J.; Kujan, L.; Pema, S.; Lever, J.; Spies, N. C.; Chiorean, A.; Rieke, D. T.; Clark, K. A.; Jani, P.; Takahashi, H.; Horak, P.; Ritter, D. I.; Zhou, X.; Ainscough, B. J.; Delong, S.; Lamping, M.; Marr, A. R.; Li, B. V.; Lin, W.-H.; Terraf, P.; Salama, Y.; Campbell, K.; Farncombe, K. M.; Ji, J.; Zhao, X.; Xu, X.; Kanagal-Shamanna, R.; Cotto, K.; Skidmore, Z. L.; Walker, J. R.; Zhang, J.; Milosavljevic, A.; Patel, R. Y.; Giles, R. H.; Kim, R. H.; Schriml, L. M.; Mardis, E.

2021-06-14 genomics
10.1101/2021.06.13.448171 bioRxiv
Show abstract

CIViC (Clinical Interpretation of Variants in Cancer; civicdb.org) is a crowd-sourced, public domain knowledgebase composed of literature-derived evidence characterizing the clinical utility of cancer variants. As clinical sequencing becomes more prevalent in cancer management, the need for cancer variant interpretation has grown beyond the capability of any single institution. With nearly 300 contributors, CIViC contains peer-reviewed, published literature curated and expert-moderated into structured data units (Evidence Items) that can be accessed globally and in real time, reducing barriers to clinical variant knowledge sharing. We have extended CIViCs functionality to support emergent variant interpretation guidelines, increase interoperability with other variant resources, and promote widespread dissemination of structured curated data. To support the full breadth of variant interpretation from basic to translational, including integration of somatic and germline variant knowledge and inference of drug response, we have enabled curation of three new evidence types (predisposing, oncogenic and functional). The growing CIViC knowledgebase distributes clinically-relevant cancer variant data currently representing >2500 variants in >400 genes from >2800 publications.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.