Challenges in periodic revision of genetic testing results: Comparison of the main classification guidelines and report of a retrospective analysis involving BRCA1/BRCA2 variants of uncertain significance

• Published in: Gene 2023-04, Vol.862, p.147281-147281, Article 147281
• Main Authors: Andreis, Tiago Finger, de Souza, Kayana Isabel Weber, Vieira, Igor Araujo, Alemar, Bárbara, Sinigaglia, Marialva, de Araújo Rocha, Yasminne Marinho, Artigalás, Osvaldo, Bittar, Camila, Oliveira Netto, Cristina Brinckmann, Ashton-Prolla, Patricia, Rosset, Clévia
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Brazilian population; BRCA1; BRCA2; Genetic testing results; Variant classification guidelines; Variant of uncertain significance; Variant reassessment
• ISSN: 0378-1119; 1879-0038
• DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2023.147281

In the context of cancer predisposition syndromes, it is widely known that the correct interpretation of germline variants identified in multigene panel testing is essential for adequate genetic counseling and clinical decision making, in which variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are not considered actionable findings. Thus, their periodic re-evaluation using appropriate guidelines is notably important. In the present study, we compared the performance of the main variant classification guidelines (ACMG, Sherloc and ENIGMA) in variant reassessment, using as input a BRCA1/2 VUS case series (retrospective analysis) from Brazil, an ethnically diverse and admixed country with substantial challenges in VUS reclassification. As main findings, two of the 15 VUS analyzed were reclassified as likely pathogenic by the 3 guidelines, BRCA1 c.4987-3C > G (rs397509213) and BRCA2 c.7868A > G (rs80359012). Moreover, challenges in variant classification and reassessment are described and additional in silico data about structural impact of the variant BRCA2 c.7868A > G are provided. We hypothesize that the establishment of a framework to reassess VUS could improve this process in health centers that have not yet implemented this practice. Results of this study underscore that periodic monitoring of the functional, clinical, and bioinformatics data of a VUS by a multidisciplinary team are of utmost importance in clinical practice. When there is a specific guideline for a given gene, such as ENIGMA for BRCA1/2, it should be considered the first option for variant assessment. Finally, recruitment of VUS carriers and their relatives to participate in variant segregation studies and publication of VUS reclassification results in the international scientific literature should be encouraged.