Generating Clinical-Grade Gene-Disease Validity Classifications Through the ClinGen Data Platforms

Genes Associated With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Reappraisal by the ClinGen Hereditary Cardiovascular Disease Gene Curation Expert Panel

BACKGROUND

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is an inherited cardiac condition affecting ∼1 in 500 and exhibits marked genetic heterogeneity. Previously published in 2019, 57 HCM-associated genes were curated providing the first systematic evaluation of gene-disease validity.

OBJECTIVES

The authors report work by the Clinical Genome Resource Hereditary Cardiovascular Disease (HCVD) Gene Curation Expert Panel (GCEP) to reappraise the clinical validity of previously curated and new putative HCM genes.

METHODS

The Clinical Genome Resource systematic gene curation framework was used to reclassify the gene-disease relationships for HCM and related syndromic entities involving left ventricular hypertrophy. Genes previously curated were included if their classification was not definitive, and if the time since curation was >2 to 3 years. New genes with literature assertions for HCM were included for initial evaluation. Existing genes were curated for new inheritance patterns where evidence existed. Curations were presented on twice monthly calls, with the HCVD GCEP composed of 29 individuals from 21 institutions across 6 countries.

RESULTS

Thirty-one genes were recurated and an additional 5 new potential HCM-associated genes were curated. Among the recurated genes, 17 (55%) genes changed classification: 1 limited and 4 disputed (from no known disease relationship), 9 disputed (from limited), and 3 definitive (from moderate). Among these, 3 (10%) genes had a clinically relevant upgrade, including TNNC1, a 9th sarcomere gene with definitive HCM association. With new evidence, 2 genes were curated for multiple inheritance patterns (TRIM63, disputed for autosomal dominant but moderate for autosomal recessive; ALPK3, strong for autosomal dominant and definitive for recessive). CSRP3 was curated for a semidominant mode of inheritance (definitive). Nine (29%) genes were downgraded to disputed, further discouraging clinical reporting of variants in these genes. Five genes recently reported to cause HCM were curated: RPS6KB1 and RBM20 (limited), KLHL24 and MT-TI (moderate), and FHOD3 (definitive).

CONCLUSIONS

We report 29 genes with definitive, strong, or moderate evidence of causation for HCM or isolated left ventricular hypertrophy, including sarcomere, sarcomere-associated, and syndromic conditions.

ClinGen recuration of hearing loss-associated genes demonstrates significant changes in gene-disease validity over time

PURPOSE

The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Hearing Loss Gene Curation Expert Panel was assembled in 2016 and has since curated 174 gene-disease relationships (GDRs) using ClinGen's semiquantitative framework. ClinGen mandates the timely recuration of all GDRs classified as Disputed, Limited, Moderate, and Strong every 2 to 3 years.

METHODS

Thirty-five GDRs met the criteria for recuration within 2 years of original curation. Previous evidence was reevaluated using the latest curation guidelines, and a comprehensive literature review was performed to obtain new evidence. Recurations were approved by the Gene Curation Expert Panel and published on the ClinGen website (www.clinicalgenome.org).

RESULTS

Eight of 35 GDRs (22%) changed their classification. Two Moderate and 5 Strong GDRs were upgraded to Definitive because of new case evidence. One Strong was subsumed under another Definitive GDR after evaluation of the lumping/splitting of disease entities. Twenty-seven of 35 patients remained unchanged, with little to no new evidence reported.

CONCLUSION

Genes classified as Moderate and Strong were likely to build evidence and change their classification over time, whereas Limited were unlikely to gain evidence. These findings highlight the critical role of recuration in ensuring that genetic tests and research studies incorporate the most recent evidence into their efforts.

Developing a scoring system for gene curation prioritization in lysosomal diseases

INTRODUCTION

Diseases caused by lysosomal dysfunction often exhibit multisystemic involvement, resulting in substantial morbidity and mortality. Ensuring accurate diagnoses for individuals with lysosomal diseases (LD) is of great importance, especially with the increasing prominence of genetic testing as a primary diagnostic method. As the list of genes associated with LD continues to expand due to the use of more comprehensive tests such as exome and genome sequencing, it is imperative to understand the clinical validity of the genes, as well as identify appropriate genes for inclusion in multi-gene testing and sequencing panels. The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) works to determine the clinical importance of genes and variants to support precision medicine. As part of this work, ClinGen has developed a semi-quantitative framework to assess the strength of evidence for the role of a gene in a disease. Given the diversity in gene composition across LD panels offered by various laboratories and the evolving comprehension of genetic variants affecting secondary lysosomal functions, we developed a scoring system to define LD (Lysosomal Disease Scoring System - LDSS). This system sought to aid in the prioritization of genes for clinical validity curation and assess their suitability for LD-targeted sequencing panels.

METHODS

Through literature review encompassing terms associated with both classically designated LD and LFRD, we identified 14 criteria grouped into "Overall Definition," "Phenotype," and "Pathophysiology." These criteria included concepts such as the "accumulation of undigested or partially digested macromolecules within the lysosome" and being "associated with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations impacting multiple organs and systems." The criteria, along with their respective weighted values, underwent refinement through expert panel evaluation differentiating them between "major" and "minor" criteria. Subsequently, the LDSS underwent validation on 12 widely acknowledged LD and was later tested by applying these criteria to the Lysosomal Disease Network's (LDN) official Gene List.

RESULTS

The final LDSS comprised 4 major criteria and 10 minor criteria, with a cutoff of 2 major or 1 major and 3 minor criteria established to define LD. Interestingly, when applied to both the LDN list and a comprehensive gene list encompassing genes included in clinical panels and published as LFRD genes, we identified four genes (GRN, SLC29A3, CLN7 and VPS33A) absent from the LDN list, that were deemed associated with LD. Conversely, a subset of non-classic genes included in the LDN list, such as MTOR, OCRL, and SLC9A6, received lower LDSS scores for their associated disease entities. While these genes may not be suitable for inclusion in clinical LD multi-gene panels, they could be considered for inclusion on other, non-LD gene panels.

DISCUSSION

The LDSS offers a systematic approach to prioritize genes for clinical validity assessment. By identifying genes with high scores on the LDSS, this method enhanced the efficiency of gene curation by the ClinGen LD GCEP.

CONCLUSION

The LDSS not only serves as a tool for gene prioritization prior to clinical validity curation, but also contributes to the ongoing discussion on the definition of LD. Moreover, the LDSS provides a flexible framework adaptable to future discoveries, ensuring its relevance in the ever-expanding landscape of LD research.