Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Sep 25;320(12):1266-1274.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.13152.

Prevalence of Variant Reclassification Following Hereditary Cancer Genetic Testing

Affiliations

Prevalence of Variant Reclassification Following Hereditary Cancer Genetic Testing

Jacqueline Mersch et al. JAMA. .

Abstract

Importance: Variant reclassification is an important component of hereditary cancer genetic testing; however, there are few published data quantifying the prevalence of reclassification.

Objective: Retrospective cohort study of individuals who had genetic testing from 2006 through 2016 at a single commercial laboratory.

Design, setting, and participants: A retrospective cohort of individuals who had genetic testing between 2006 and 2016 at a single commercial laboratory was assessed. Variants were classified as benign, likely benign, variant of uncertain significance, likely pathogenic, or pathogenic. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted for patients from the University of Texas Southwestern (UTSW) Medical Center.

Exposures: Hereditary cancer genetic testing.

Main outcomes and measures: Frequency of and time to amended reports; frequency and types of variant reclassification.

Results: From 2006 through 2018, 1.45 million individuals (median [interquartile range] age at testing, 49 years [40.69-58.31 years], 95.6% women) had genetic testing, and 56.6% (n = 821 724) had a personal history of cancer. A total of 1.67 million initial tests were reported and 59 955 amended reports were issued due to variant reclassification. Overall, 6.4% (2868 of 44 777) of unique variants were reclassified. Reclassification to a different clinical category was rare among unique variants initially classified as pathogenic or likely pathogenic (0.7%, 61 of 9112) or benign or likely benign (0.2%, 15 of 8995). However, 7.7% (2048 of 26 670) of unique variants of uncertain significance were reclassified: 91.2% (1867 of 2048) were downgraded to benign or likely benign (median time to amended report, 1.17 years), 8.7% (178 of 2048) were upgraded to pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (median time to amended report, 1.86 years). Because most variants were observed in more than 1 individual, 24.9% (46 890 of 184 327) of all reported variants of uncertain significance were reclassified.

Conclusions and relevance: Following hereditary cancer genetic testing at a single commercial laboratory, 24.9% of variants of uncertain significance were reclassified, which included both downgrades and upgrades. Further research is needed to assess generalizability of the findings for other laboratories, as well as the clinical consequences of the reclassification as a component of a genetic testing program.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All the authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Drs Cox, K. Brown, and Esterling and Mss Mundt, Aston, and Manley were employed by Myriad Genetic Laboratories at the time of this study. Ms N. Brown was employed by UT Southwestern at the time of the study, but is now employed by Myriad Genetic Laboratories. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Year-Specific Time to Reclassification
For amended reports sent due to variant reclassification, the time to the amended report is shown according to the year of the initial report. Pan-cancer panel testing was introduced in 2013. Prior to 2013, all amended reports were for single-syndrome testing. The median time for each year is indicated by the thick horizontal line and the interquartile range is indicated by the box. The error bars represent 1.5 times the interquartile range. Data points beyond error bars represent outlying points.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Daly M, Pilarski R, Berry M, et al. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. (Version 2.2017). http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/genetics_screening.pdf 2017. Accessed June 1, 2018.
    1. Robson M, Im SA, Senkus E, et al. . Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(6):523-533. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1706450 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, et al. ; ACMG Laboratory Quality Assurance Committee . 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. Genet Med. 2015;17(5):405-424. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.30 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borras E, Chang K, Pande M, et al. . In Silico systems biology analysis of variants of uncertain significance in lynch syndrome supports the prioritization of functional molecular validation. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2017;10(10):580-587. doi:10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-17-0058 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eggington JM, Bowles KR, Moyes K, et al. . A comprehensive laboratory-based program for classification of variants of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer genes. Clin Genet. 2014;86(3):229-237. doi:10.1111/cge.12315 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types