Reassessing genetic variant classifications using a comprehensive data summary reduced the discordance rate among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers from 20.5% to 10.7%.
Observational
Yes
Absolute Event Rate: 10.7% vs 20.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
BACKGROUND: Clinically impactful differences in the interpretation of genetic test results occur between laboratories and clinicians. To improve the classification of variants, a better understanding of why discrepancies occur and how they can be reduced is needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: <0.001). Discordance in SHaRe most frequently occurred because hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers had access to different privately held data when making their classifications (75.0%). Centers reassessed their classifications based on a comprehensive and current data summary, leading to reclassifications that reduced the discordance rate from 20.5% to 10.7%. Different interpretations of rarity and co-occurrence with pathogenic variants contributed to residual discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Discordance in variant classification among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers is largely attributable to privately held data. Some discrepancies are caused by differences in expert assessment of conflicting data. Discordance was markedly lower among centers specialized in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy than among clinical laboratories, suggesting that optimal genetic test interpretation occurs in the context of clinical care delivered by specialized centers with both clinical and genetics expertise.
Furqan et al. (Sun,) conducted a observational in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Data sharing and reassessment vs. Initial classification was evaluated on Discordance rate in variant classification (p=<0.001). Reassessing genetic variant classifications using a comprehensive data summary reduced the discordance rate among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers from 20.5% to 10.7%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: