Oncogenicity Variant Interpreter (OncoVI): oncogenicity guidelines implementation to support somatic variants interpretation in precision oncology
Carta, M. G.; Toegel, L.; Hoelsken, A.; Schubart, C.; Sticht, H.; Stoehr, R.; Spoerl, S.; Meidenbauer, N.; Hartmann, A.; Magni, P.; Haller, F.; Ferrazzi, F.
Show abstract
BackgroundIn precision oncology, the accurate and reproducible classification of variant oncogenicity is fundamental for therapy decision making. In 2022, a set of guidelines for the classification of oncogenicity of somatic variants in cancer were defined by the Clinical Genome Resource, the Cancer Genomics Consortium, and the Variant Interpretation for Cancer Consortium. However, to date an implementation that automates the evaluation of these criteria does not exist. Furthermore, for the majority of the criteria, the interpretation of the criterion-associated textual indication and the choice of publicly available resources to gather criterion-supporting information depends on the user. Thus, the risk of a variant being classified differently by independent laboratories is relevant, with implications for the management of patient care. MethodsHere, we developed Oncogenicity Variant Interpreter (OncoVI), a fully-automated Python-based implementation of the oncogenicity guidelines. First, each criterion was interpreted and publicly available resources were identified to be utilised as reference. Then, criteria were implemented in OncoVI and the information reported by the associated resources were integrated. OncoVI is part of a broader Python-framework that, starting from the genomic position of the variant, automatically performs functional annotation, collects the available evidence from the reference resources, and provides a classification of oncogenicity. ResultsOn the set of 93 somatic variants provided by the guidelines OncoVI achieved an overall accuracy of 80%, with a sensitivity of 88% in the classification of Oncogenic/Likely Oncogenic variants. On a real-world data set of 7,802 variants from 557 patients previously evaluated within the Molecular Tumour Board (MTB) Erlangen, an agreement of 79% was observed between OncoVIs oncogenicity classification and the MTB pathogenicity assessment. In addition, the pathogenicity classification of 135 variants of the MTB data set was re-assessed by expert biologists adhering solely to the oncogenicity guidelines. This re-evaluation confirmed the validity of OncoVIs interpretation of the resources chosen as reference, but it also underlined the ability of experts in solving conflicting evidence. ConclusionsTaken together, OncoVI provides an effective implementation of the oncogenicity guidelines, thus facilitating their adoption and supporting the reproducible and harmonised oncogenicity classification of somatic variants between institutions.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- OncoGEMINI: Software for Investigating Tumor Variants From Multiple Biopsies With Integrated Cancer Annotations 92%
- Evaluating Genome Sequencing Strategies: Trio, Singleton, and Standard Testing in Rare Disease Diagnosis 92%
- MetaRNN: Differentiating Rare Pathogenic and Rare Benign Missense SNVs and InDels Using Deep Learning 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of Bayesian Classification Framework on the Variant Classification of Hereditary Cancer Predisposition Genes 94%
- Genome Alert!: a standardized procedure for genomic variant reinterpretation and automated genotype-phenotype reassessment in clinical routine 93%
- Impact of genetic counselling strategy on diagnostic yield and workload for whole genome sequencing-based tumour diagnostics 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant interpretation guidelines for germline TP53 variants 92%
- A protein-centric approach for exome variant aggregation enables sensitive association analysis with clinical outcomes 92%
- Cancer SIGVAR: A semi-automated interpretation tool for germline variants of hereditary cancer-related genes 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Assessing performance of pathogenicity predictors using clinically-relevant variant datasets 94%
- Exome sequencing as a first-tier test for copy number variant detection : retrospective evaluation and prospective screening in 2418 cases 91%
- The PS4-Likelihood Ratio Calculator: Flexible allocation of evidence weighting for case-control data in variant classification 91%
"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.