Yann Christinat, Baptiste Hamelin, Ilaria Alborelli, Paolo Angelino, Valérie Barbié, Bettina Bisig, Heather Dawson, Milo Frattini, Tobias Grob, Wolfram Jochum, Ronny Nienhold, Thomas McKee, Matthias Matter, Edoardo Missiaglia, Francesca Molinari, Sacha Rothschild, Anna Bettina Sobottka-Brillout, Erik Vassella, Martin Zoche, Kirsten D Mertz
{"title":"在临床癌症治疗中报告体细胞变异:瑞士分子病理学学会的建议。","authors":"Yann Christinat, Baptiste Hamelin, Ilaria Alborelli, Paolo Angelino, Valérie Barbié, Bettina Bisig, Heather Dawson, Milo Frattini, Tobias Grob, Wolfram Jochum, Ronny Nienhold, Thomas McKee, Matthias Matter, Edoardo Missiaglia, Francesca Molinari, Sacha Rothschild, Anna Bettina Sobottka-Brillout, Erik Vassella, Martin Zoche, Kirsten D Mertz","doi":"10.1007/s00428-024-03951-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Somatic variant testing through next-generation sequencing (NGS) is well integrated into Swiss molecular pathology laboratories and has become a standard diagnostic method for numerous indications in cancer patient care. Currently, there is a wide variation in reporting practices within our country, and as patients move between different hospitals, it is increasingly necessary to standardize NGS reports to ease their reinterpretation. Additionally, as many different stakeholders-oncologists, hematologists, geneticists, pathologists, and patients-have access to the NGS report, it needs to contain comprehensive and detailed information in order to answer the questions of experts and avoid misinterpretation by non-experts. In 2017, the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics conducted a survey to assess the differences in NGS reporting practices across ten pathology institutes in Switzerland. The survey examined 68 reporting items and identified 48 discrepancies. Based on these findings, the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology initiated a Delphi method to reach a consensus on a set of recommendations for NGS reporting. Reports should include clinical information about the patient and the diagnosis, technical details about the sample and the test performed, and a list of all clinically relevant variants and variants of uncertain significance. In the absence of a consensus on an actionability scheme, the five-class pathogenicity scheme proposed by the ACMG/AMP guideline must be included in the reports. The Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology recognizes the importance of including clinical actionability in the report and calls on the European community of molecular pathologists and oncologists to reach a consensus on this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":23514,"journal":{"name":"Virchows Archiv","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reporting of somatic variants in clinical cancer care: recommendations of the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology.\",\"authors\":\"Yann Christinat, Baptiste Hamelin, Ilaria Alborelli, Paolo Angelino, Valérie Barbié, Bettina Bisig, Heather Dawson, Milo Frattini, Tobias Grob, Wolfram Jochum, Ronny Nienhold, Thomas McKee, Matthias Matter, Edoardo Missiaglia, Francesca Molinari, Sacha Rothschild, Anna Bettina Sobottka-Brillout, Erik Vassella, Martin Zoche, Kirsten D Mertz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00428-024-03951-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Somatic variant testing through next-generation sequencing (NGS) is well integrated into Swiss molecular pathology laboratories and has become a standard diagnostic method for numerous indications in cancer patient care. Currently, there is a wide variation in reporting practices within our country, and as patients move between different hospitals, it is increasingly necessary to standardize NGS reports to ease their reinterpretation. Additionally, as many different stakeholders-oncologists, hematologists, geneticists, pathologists, and patients-have access to the NGS report, it needs to contain comprehensive and detailed information in order to answer the questions of experts and avoid misinterpretation by non-experts. In 2017, the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics conducted a survey to assess the differences in NGS reporting practices across ten pathology institutes in Switzerland. The survey examined 68 reporting items and identified 48 discrepancies. Based on these findings, the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology initiated a Delphi method to reach a consensus on a set of recommendations for NGS reporting. Reports should include clinical information about the patient and the diagnosis, technical details about the sample and the test performed, and a list of all clinically relevant variants and variants of uncertain significance. In the absence of a consensus on an actionability scheme, the five-class pathogenicity scheme proposed by the ACMG/AMP guideline must be included in the reports. The Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology recognizes the importance of including clinical actionability in the report and calls on the European community of molecular pathologists and oncologists to reach a consensus on this issue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-024-03951-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virchows Archiv","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-024-03951-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reporting of somatic variants in clinical cancer care: recommendations of the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology.
Somatic variant testing through next-generation sequencing (NGS) is well integrated into Swiss molecular pathology laboratories and has become a standard diagnostic method for numerous indications in cancer patient care. Currently, there is a wide variation in reporting practices within our country, and as patients move between different hospitals, it is increasingly necessary to standardize NGS reports to ease their reinterpretation. Additionally, as many different stakeholders-oncologists, hematologists, geneticists, pathologists, and patients-have access to the NGS report, it needs to contain comprehensive and detailed information in order to answer the questions of experts and avoid misinterpretation by non-experts. In 2017, the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics conducted a survey to assess the differences in NGS reporting practices across ten pathology institutes in Switzerland. The survey examined 68 reporting items and identified 48 discrepancies. Based on these findings, the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology initiated a Delphi method to reach a consensus on a set of recommendations for NGS reporting. Reports should include clinical information about the patient and the diagnosis, technical details about the sample and the test performed, and a list of all clinically relevant variants and variants of uncertain significance. In the absence of a consensus on an actionability scheme, the five-class pathogenicity scheme proposed by the ACMG/AMP guideline must be included in the reports. The Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology recognizes the importance of including clinical actionability in the report and calls on the European community of molecular pathologists and oncologists to reach a consensus on this issue.
期刊介绍:
Manuscripts of original studies reinforcing the evidence base of modern diagnostic pathology, using immunocytochemical, molecular and ultrastructural techniques, will be welcomed. In addition, papers on critical evaluation of diagnostic criteria but also broadsheets and guidelines with a solid evidence base will be considered. Consideration will also be given to reports of work in other fields relevant to the understanding of human pathology as well as manuscripts on the application of new methods and techniques in pathology. Submission of purely experimental articles is discouraged but manuscripts on experimental work applicable to diagnostic pathology are welcomed. Biomarker studies are welcomed but need to abide by strict rules (e.g. REMARK) of adequate sample size and relevant marker choice. Single marker studies on limited patient series without validated application will as a rule not be considered. Case reports will only be considered when they provide substantial new information with an impact on understanding disease or diagnostic practice.