Abstract:Disclaimer: These ACMG Standards and Guidelines were developed primarily as an educational resource for clinical laboratory geneticists to help them provide quality clinical laboratory services. Adherence to these standards and guidelines is voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. These Standards and Guidelines should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinical laboratory geneticist should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinical laboratory geneticists are encouraged to document in the patient’s record the rationale for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with these Standards and Guidelines. They also are advised to take notice of the date any particular guideline was adopted and to consider other relevant medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date. It also would be prudent to consider whether intellectual property interests may restrict the performance of certain tests and other procedures.The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) previously developed guidance for the interpretation of sequence variants.1 In the past decade, sequencing technology has evolved rapidly with the advent of high-throughput next-generation sequencing. By adopting and leveraging next-generation sequencing, clinical laboratories are now performing an ever-increasing catalogue of genetic testing spanning genotyping, single genes, gene panels, exomes, genomes, transcriptomes, and epigenetic assays for genetic disorders. By virtue of increased complexity, this shift in genetic testing has been accompanied by new challenges in sequence interpretation. In this context the ACMG convened a workgroup in 2013 comprising representatives from the ACMG, the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP), and the College of American Pathologists to revisit and revise the standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants. The group consisted of clinical laboratory directors and clinicians. This report represents expert opinion of the workgroup with input from ACMG, AMP, and College of American Pathologists stakeholders. These recommendations primarily apply to the breadth of genetic tests used in clinical laboratories, including genotyping, single genes, panels, exomes, and genomes. This report recommends the use of specific standard terminology—“pathogenic,” “likely pathogenic,” “uncertain significance,” “likely benign,” and “benign”—to describe variants identified in genes that cause Mendelian disorders. Moreover, this recommendation describes a process for classifying variants into these five categories based on criteria using typical types of variant evidence (e.g., population data, computational data, functional data, segregation data). Because of the increased complexity of analysis and interpretation of clinical genetic testing described in this report, the ACMG strongly recommends that clinical molecular genetic testing should be performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–approved laboratory, with results interpreted by a board-certified clinical molecular geneticist or molecular genetic pathologist or the equivalent.Genet Med17 5, 405–423.

Classification of Somatic Variants in Solid Tumors Detected by Next-Generation Sequencing (ngs) and the Need for Clinical Guidelines.

Standards for the classification of pathogenicity of somatic variants in cancer (oncogenicity): Joint recommendations of Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen), Cancer Genomics Consortium (CGC), and Variant Interpretation for Cancer Consortium (VICC)

Reporting of somatic variants in clinical cancer care: recommendations of the Swiss Society of Molecular Pathology

Application of a 5-Tiered Scheme for Standardized Classification of 2,360 Unique Mismatch Repair Gene Variants in the InSiGHT Locus-Specific Database.

Variant classification changes over time in the clinical molecular diagnostic laboratory setting

Clinical Utility of Molecular Tumor Board Review for Identification of Possible Germline Pathogenic Variants on Tumor Next-Generation Sequencing Reports

Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology

Evaluation of for variant classification in missense variants of solid cancer with actionable genetic targets

Molecular Characterization and Prognostic Analysis of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Single Centric Real-World Study.

Traumatic brain injury: from impact to rehabilitation.

Assessing actionability and incidental findings of germline variants in two precision oncology trials

Reliable assessment of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline variants by next-generation sequencing: a multicenter study

From somatic variants towards precision oncology: Evidence-driven reporting of treatment options in molecular tumor boards

Germline Variants of Uncertain Significance in Gynecologic Oncology Patients

Classification of BRCA2 Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Using an ACMG/AMP Model Incorporating a Homology-Directed Repair (HDR) Functional Assay

Distinct rates of VUS reclassification are observed when subclassifying VUS by evidence level

Synthesis and biological activity of novel oxazolidinones.

Current and Future Approaches to Classify VUSs in LGMD-Related Genes

Clinical implications of next-generation sequencing on pediatric solid tumors.

Evaluation of Bayesian Point-Based System on the Variant Classification of Hereditary Cancer Predisposition Genes

Identifying Associations between Somatic Mutations and Clinicopathologic Findings in Lung Cancer Pathology Reports