Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Original research
Enhancing variant of uncertain significance (VUS) interpretation in neurogenetics: collaborative experiences from a tertiary care centre
  1. Kayla Horowitz1,
  2. Nellie H Fotopoulos1,
  3. Alana J Mistry2,
  4. Justin Simo1,3,
  5. Miranda Medeiros1,2,
  6. Isabela D Bucco4,
  7. Mia Ginsberg1,5,
  8. Emily Dwosh6,7,
  9. Roberta La Piana1,
  10. Guy A Rouleau1,2,3,
  11. Allison A Dilliott1,3,
  12. Sali M K Farhan1,2,3
  1. 1Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  2. 2Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  3. 3Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  4. 4Department of Genetics, Federal University of Parana, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
  5. 5Department of Cognitive Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  6. 6Department of Medical Genetics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  7. 7University of British Columbia Hospital Clinic for Alzheimer Disease and Related Disorders, Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sali M K Farhan; sali.farhan{at}mcgill.ca; Dr Allison A Dilliott; allison.dilliott{at}mcgill.ca

Abstract

Background The findings of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) on a clinical genetic testing report pose a challenge for attending healthcare professionals (HCPs) in patient care. Here, we describe the outcomes of multidisciplinary VUS Rounds, implemented at a neurological disease tertiary care centre, which aid in interpreting and communicating VUS identified in our neurogenetics patient population.

Methods VUS Rounds brought together genetic counsellors, molecular geneticists and scientists to evaluate VUS against genomic and phenotypic evidence and assign an internal temperature classification of ‘VUS Hot’, ‘True VUS’ or ‘VUS Cold’, corresponding to potential pathogenicity. Biweekly meetings were held among the committee to deliberate variant classifications, determine additional clinical management actions and discuss nuances of VUS result communication.

Results In total, 143 VUS identified in 72 individuals with neurological disease were curated between October 2022 and December 2023. Of these, 12.6% were classified as VUS Hot, carried by 22.2% of the individuals, allowing for prioritisation of additional evaluation to determine potential pathogenicity of the variants, such as clinical follow-up or segregation analysis. In contrast, 45.4% of VUS were Cold and could be eliminated from further consideration in the carrier’s care. We thoroughly evaluated the various evidence that contributed to our VUS classifications and resulting clinical actions.

Conclusions The assessment of VUS leveraging multidisciplinary collaboration allowed us to delineate required follow-up analyses for our neurology patient population. Integration of VUS Rounds into healthcare practices ensures equitable knowledge dissemination among HCPs and effective incorporation of uncertain genetic results into patient care.

  • Genetic Counseling
  • Genetic Testing
  • Genetic Variation
  • Neurology

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • AAD and SMKF are joint senior authors.

  • Contributors Study design and conceptualisation: KH, NHF, AJM, AAD and SMKF. Data acquisition: KH, NHF, AJM, JS, MM, IDB, MG, ED, AAD and SMKF. Data analysis and interpretation: KH, NHF and AAD. Manuscript drafting: KH and AAD. Manuscript revising: KH, NHF, AJM, JS, MM, IDB, MG, ED, RLP, GAR, AAD and SMKF. Resources, support and supervision: RLP, GAR, AAD and SMKF. Guarantor: SMKF.

  • Funding RL received a Research Scholar Junior 1 Award from the Fonds de Recherche du Québec—Santé. AAD is supported by the Canadian Institute of Health Research Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship program. SMKF is supported by grants from Brain Canada, ALS Society of Canada and the Tanenbaum Open Science Institute at The Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.