1. Dutch genome diagnostic laboratories accelerated and improved variant interpretation and increased accuracy by sharing data
- Author
-
Bart Charbon, Ivo F.A.C. Fokkema, Ronald H. Lekanne Deprez, Jeroen F.J. Laros, Claudia A. L. Ruivenkamp, Bart de Koning, Richard J. Sinke, Morris A. Swertz, Gert Thijs, Quinten Waisfisz, Nienke Wieskamp, Rolph Pfundt, Marielle E. van Gijn, Johan T. den Dunnen, Isaac J. Nijman, Kristin M. Abbott, R. Moritz, Mariska Slofstra, Jasper J. Saris, Rubayte Rahman, Kasper Joeri van der Velde, Marinus J. Blok, Maartje J Vogel, MUMC+: DA KG Lab Centraal Lab (9), RS: GROW - R4 - Reproductive and Perinatal Medicine, Groningen Institute for Gastro Intestinal Genetics and Immunology (3GI), Clinical Genetics, ACS - Pulmonary hypertension & thrombosis, Human Genetics, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development (AR&D), and Human genetics
- Subjects
data sharing ,Guidelines as Topic ,Biology ,Dna variants ,computer.software_genre ,Genome ,RECOMMENDATIONS ,CLASSIFICATION ,03 medical and health sciences ,Databases ,All institutes and research themes of the Radboud University Medical Center ,Databases, Genetic ,Genetics ,SEQUENCE VARIANTS ,diagnostics ,Humans ,Genetics(clinical) ,whole-exome sequencing ,Genetics (clinical) ,Exome sequencing ,database ,030304 developmental biology ,Netherlands ,0303 health sciences ,Neurodevelopmental disorders Donders Center for Medical Neuroscience [Radboudumc 7] ,business.industry ,Information Dissemination ,CARDIOMYOPATHIES ,030305 genetics & heredity ,Genetic Diseases, Inborn ,Data interpretation ,Genetic Variation ,High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing ,Sequence Analysis, DNA ,Pathogenicity ,Penetrance ,3. Good health ,Data Accuracy ,Data sharing ,Data quality ,NGS ,whole‐exome sequencing ,Artificial intelligence ,business ,Laboratories ,computer ,Natural language processing - Abstract
Each year diagnostic laboratories in the Netherlands profile thousands of individuals for heritable disease using next‐generation sequencing (NGS). This requires pathogenicity classification of millions of DNA variants on the standard 5‐tier scale. To reduce time spent on data interpretation and increase data quality and reliability, the nine Dutch labs decided to publicly share their classifications. Variant classifications of nearly 100,000 unique variants were catalogued and compared in a centralized MOLGENIS database. Variants classified by more than one center were labeled as “consensus” when classifications agreed, and shared internationally with LOVD and ClinVar. When classifications opposed (LB/B vs. LP/P), they were labeled “conflicting”, while other nonconsensus observations were labeled “no consensus”. We assessed our classifications using the InterVar software to compare to ACMG 2015 guidelines, showing 99.7% overall consistency with only 0.3% discrepancies. Differences in classifications between Dutch labs or between Dutch labs and ACMG were mainly present in genes with low penetrance or for late onset disorders and highlight limitations of the current 5‐tier classification system. The data sharing boosted the quality of DNA diagnostics in Dutch labs, an initiative we hope will be followed internationally. Recently, a positive match with a case from outside our consortium resulted in a more definite disease diagnosis.
- Published
- 2019