Search

Despite genomic sequencing rapidly transforming from being a bench-side tool to a routine procedure in a hospital, there is a noticeable lack of genomic analysis software that supports both clinical and research workflows as well as crowdsourcing. Furthermore, most existing software packages are not forward-compatible in regards to supporting ever-changing diagnostic rules adopted by the genetics community. Regular updates of genomics databases pose challenges for reproducible and traceable automated genetic diagnostics tools. Lastly, most of the software tools score low on explainability amongst clinicians. We have created a fully open-source variant curation tool, AnFiSA, with the intention to invite and accept contributions from clinicians, researchers, and professional software developers. The design of AnFiSA addresses the aforementioned issues via the following architectural principles: using a multidimensional database management system (DBMS) for genomic data to address reproducibility, curated decision trees adaptable to changing clinical rules, and a crowdsourcing-friendly interface to address difficult-to-diagnose cases. We discuss how we have chosen our technology stack and describe the design and implementation of the software. Finally, we show in detail how selected workflows can be implemented using the current version of AnFiSA by a medical geneticist., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Clinically relevant subtypes exist for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but molecular characterization is not yet standard in clinical care. We implemented a biopsy protocol to perform time-sensitive whole-exome sequencing and RNA sequencing for patients with advanced PDAC. Therapeutically relevant genomic alterations were identified in 48% (34/71) and pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline alterations in 18% (13/71) of patients. Overall, 30% (21/71) of enrolled patients experienced a change in clinical management as a result of genomic data. Twenty-six patients had germline and/or somatic alterations in DNA-damage repair genes, and 5 additional patients had mutational signatures of homologous recombination deficiency but no identified causal genomic alteration. Two patients had oncogenic in-frame BRAF deletions, and we report the first clinical evidence that this alteration confers sensitivity to MAPK pathway inhibition. Moreover, we identified tumor/stroma gene expression signatures with clinical relevance. Collectively, these data demonstrate the feasibility and value of real-time genomic characterization of advanced PDAC. Significance: Molecular analyses of metastatic PDAC tumors are challenging due to the heterogeneous cellular composition of biopsy specimens and rapid progression of the disease. Using an integrated multidisciplinary biopsy program, we demonstrate that real-time genomic characterization of advanced PDAC can identify clinically relevant alterations that inform management of this difficult disease. Cancer Discov; 8(9); 1096-111. ©2018 AACR. See related commentary by Collisson, p. 1062 This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1047 ., (©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Evaluating the pathogenicity of a variant is challenging given the plethora of types of genetic evidence that laboratories consider. Deciding how to weigh each type of evidence is difficult, and standards have been needed. In 2015, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) published guidelines for the assessment of variants in genes associated with Mendelian diseases. Nine molecular diagnostic laboratories involved in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium piloted these guidelines on 99 variants spanning all categories (pathogenic, likely pathogenic, uncertain significance, likely benign, and benign). Nine variants were distributed to all laboratories, and the remaining 90 were evaluated by three laboratories. The laboratories classified each variant by using both the laboratory's own method and the ACMG-AMP criteria. The agreement between the two methods used within laboratories was high (K-alpha = 0.91) with 79% concordance. However, there was only 34% concordance for either classification system across laboratories. After consensus discussions and detailed review of the ACMG-AMP criteria, concordance increased to 71%. Causes of initial discordance in ACMG-AMP classifications were identified, and recommendations on clarification and increased specification of the ACMG-AMP criteria were made. In summary, although an initial pilot of the ACMG-AMP guidelines did not lead to increased concordance in variant interpretation, comparing variant interpretations to identify differences and having a common framework to facilitate resolution of those differences were beneficial for improving agreement, allowing iterative movement toward increased reporting consistency for variants in genes associated with monogenic disease., (Copyright © 2016 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)