Criteria Specification (CSpec) Registry is intended to provide access to the Criteria Specifications used and applied by ClinGen Variant Curation Expert Panels and biocurators in the classification of variants.
For general information about the ClinGen Expert Panels and Variant Curation please visit: Clinical Domain Working Groups. For specific inquiries regarding content correction or adding a new criteria specification refer to the Help page.
Should you encounter any issues regarding the data displayed, lack of functionality or other problems, please let us know by contacting us via email.
Submitting Pilot Rules. All pilot variants are attached in the LZTR1 submission.
Criteria & Strength Specifications
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
PVS1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Null variant (nonsense, frameshift, canonical +/−1 or 2 splice sites, initiation codon, single or multi-exon deletion) in a gene where loss of function (LOF) is a known mechanism of disease.
Caveats: • Beware of genes where LOF is not a known disease mechanism (e.g. GFAP, MYH7). • Use caution interpreting LOF variants at the extreme 3’ end of a gene. • Use caution with splice variants that are predicted to lead to exon skipping but leave the remainder of the protein intact. • Use caution in the presence of multiple transcripts. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Not Applicable
Comments:
Not applicable.
|
||||
PS1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Same amino acid change as a previously established pathogenic variant regardless of nucleotide change.
Example: Val->Leu caused by either G>C or G>T in the same codon. Caveat: Beware of changes that impact splicing rather than at the amino acid/protein level. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Same amino acid change as a previously established pathogenic variant regardless of nucleotide change. Applicable for observed analogous residue positions in SOS1 and SOS2.
Modification Type:
Analogous Gene
Moderate
Supporting
Instructions:
Same amino acid change as a previously established pathogenic variant regardless of nucleotide change. Not Applicable
Comments:
Previously established variant must be established as pathogenic per these criteria for germline RASopathy variants. This evidence rule can also be applied for the any observed analogous residue positions/regions throughout the gene in highly analogous groupings below:
* Group 1: HRAS, NRAS, KRAS
* Group 2: MAP2K1, MAP2K2
* Group 3: SOS1, SOS2
|
||||
PS2 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
De novo (both maternity and paternity confirmed) in a patient with the disease and no family history.
Note: Confirmation of paternity only is insufficient. Egg donation, surrogate motherhood, errors in embryo transfer, etc. can contribute to non-maternity. Stand Alone
Very Strong
4 Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Strong
2 Points.
Modification Type:
None
Moderate
1 Point.
Modification Type:
Strength
Supporting
Instructions:
Follow SVI recommendations for point-based scoring in conjunction with PM6 (see Reference 1) and phenotypic specifications: full points awarded with RASopathy phenotypes, reduced points applicable to cases with minimal phenotypic information (i.e. prenatal cases, cases with a clinical order of a RASopathy panel without clinical information, and cases with limited clinical information in other global tests (such as WES)). Not Applicable
Comments:
PS2_Very Strong: ≥2 independent occurrences of PS2 OR ≥2 independent occurrences of PM6 and one occurrence of PS2. Evidence from literature must be fully evaluated to support independent events.
|
||||
PS3 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Well-established in vitro or in vivo functional studies supportive of a damaging effect on the gene or gene product.
Note: Functional studies that have been validated and shown to be reproducible and robust in a clinical diagnostic laboratory setting are considered the most well-established. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Two or more different approved assays.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific,Gene-specific,Strength
Supporting
One approved assay.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific,Gene-specific,Strength
Instructions:
Well-established in vitro or in vivo functional studies supportive of a damaging effect on the gene or gene product. Approved assays are available in the supplemental materials. Not Applicable
Comments:
Approved functional studies are available for each individual gene in the supplemental material. Additional functional studies can be submitted to the expert panel for approval.
|
||||
PS4 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
The prevalence of the variant in affected individuals is significantly increased compared to the prevalence in controls.
Note 1: Relative risk (RR) or odds ratio (OR), as obtained from case-control studies, is >5.0 and the confidence interval around the estimate of RR or OR does not include 1.0. See manuscript for detailed guidance. Note 2: In instances of very rare variants where case-control studies may not reach statistical significance, the prior observation of the variant in multiple unrelated patients with the same phenotype, and its absence in controls, may be used as moderate level of evidence. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
≥5 points.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Moderate
≥3 points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Supporting
≥1 points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Instructions:
Strength adjustment using point-based scoring for autosomal dominant cases with phenotypic specifications: full points awarded with RASopathy phenotypes, reduced points applicable to cases with minimal phenotypic information (i.e. prenatal cases, cases with a clinical order of a RASopathy panel without clinical information, and cases with limited clinical information in other global tests (such as WES)). Not Applicable
Comments:
PS4: ≥5 independent occurrences
PS4_Moderate: ≥3 independent occurrences
PS4_Supporting: ≥1 independent occurrences
|
||||
PM1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Located in a mutational hot spot and/or critical and well-established functional domain (e.g. active site of an enzyme) without benign variation.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Applicable only to critical and well-established functional domains available in the supplementary table (PH domain [AA 418-498]). Not applicable to specific amino acid residues (see BP5).
Modification Type:
Gene-specific
Supporting
Instructions:
Located in a mutational hot spot and/or critical and well-established functional domain (e.g. active site of an enzyme) without benign variation. PM1 and PM5 may be used in conjunction at moderate levels, however, PM1 may not be applied if PM5_Strong is applied to avoid overweighting. Not Applicable
Comments:
Not applicable for SOS2.
|
||||
PM2 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Absent from controls (or at extremely low frequency if recessive) in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes or Exome Aggregation Consortium.
Caveat: Population data for indels may be poorly called by next generation sequencing. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
The variant must be absent from controls (gnomAD).
Modification Type:
Strength
Instructions:
Absent from controls (or at extremely low frequency if recessive) in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes or Exome Aggregation Consortium. Not Applicable
Comments:
The variant must be completely absent from all population databases.
|
||||
PM3 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
For recessive disorders, detected in trans with a pathogenic variant
Note: This requires testing of parents (or offspring) to determine phase. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Not Applicable
Comments:
Not applicable.
|
||||
PM4 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Protein length changes due to in-frame deletions/insertions in a non-repeat region or stop-loss variants.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
No known repetitive areas in gene. Use as described.
Modification Type:
General recommendation
Supporting
Instructions:
Protein length changes due to in-frame deletions/insertions in a non-repeat region or stop-loss variants. Not Applicable
|
||||
PM5 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Novel missense change at an amino acid residue where a different missense change determined to be pathogenic has been seen before.
Example: Arg156His is pathogenic; now you observe Arg156Cys. Caveat: Beware of changes that impact splicing rather than at the amino acid/protein level. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
≥2 different [likely] pathogenic residues changes at the same codon observed in ≥5 probands.
Modification Type:
Analogous Gene,Strength
Moderate
1 [likely] pathogenic residue change at the same codon observed in ≥5 probands.
Modification Type:
Analogous Gene,Disease-specific
Supporting
Instructions:
Applicable for observed analogous residue positions in SOS1 and SOS2. PM1 and PM5 may be used in conjunction at moderate levels, however, PM1 may not be applied if PM5_Strong is applied to avoid overweighting. Not Applicable
Comments:
Previously established variant must be established as pathogenic per these criteria. Amino acid changes of variants should be concordant with pathogenicity based on how conservative or non-conservative (within the context of amino acid chain groupings) the residue change is relative to the known pathogenic residue changes. This evidence rule can also be used for pathogenic missense variants seen in the same analogous residue position in highly analogous groupings below:
Group 1: HRAS, NRAS, KRAS
Group 2: MAP2K1, MAP2K2
Group 3: SOS1, SOS2
This rule should not be used as independent criteria for calculating pathogenicity in conjunction with PM1 if the amino acid residue being interrogated is explicitly designated as a “mutational hot-spot”. For example, Gly12 in HRAS is listed as a hot-spot for PM1 usage. In these situations, only PM1 should be used when combining criteria for final variant classification in order to avoid premature designation of a likely pathogenic classification in the absence of other evidence for pathogenicity.
|
||||
PM6 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Assumed de novo, but without confirmation of paternity and maternity.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
2 Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Moderate
1 Point.
Modification Type:
None
Supporting
0.5 Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Instructions:
Follow SVI recommendations for point-based scoring in conjunction with PS2 (see Reference 1) and phenotypic specifications: full points awarded with RASopathy phenotypes, reduced points applicable to cases with minimal phenotypic information (i.e. prenatal cases, cases with a clinical order of a RASopathy panel without clinical information, and cases with limited clinical information in other global tests (such as WES)). Not Applicable
Comments:
PM6_Strong: ≥2 independent occurrences of PM6. Evidence from literature must be fully evaluated to support independent events.
PS2_VeryStrong: ≥2 independent occurrences of PS2 OR ≥2 independent occurrences of PM6 and one occurrence of PS2. Evidence from literature must be fully evaluated to support independent events.
|
||||
PP1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Co-segregation with disease in multiple affected family members in a gene definitively known to cause the disease.
Note: May be used as stronger evidence with increasing segregation data. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
≥7 informative meioses.
Modification Type:
Strength
Moderate
≥5 informative meioses.
Modification Type:
Strength
Supporting
≥3 informative meioses.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Instructions:
Segregation in more than one family is recommended. Not Applicable
Comments:
PP1_Moderate: ≥5 informative meioses
PP1_Strong: ≥7 informative meioses
|
||||
PP2 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Missense variant in a gene that has a low rate of benign missense variation and where missense variants are a common mechanism of disease.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Not Applicable
Comments:
Not applicable because missense z score is <3.09 in gnomAD.
|
||||
PP3 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Multiple lines of computational evidence support a deleterious effect on the gene or gene product (conservation, evolutionary, splicing impact, etc.).
Caveat: As many in silico algorithms use the same or very similar input for their predictions, each algorithm should not be counted as an independent criterion. PP3 can be used only once in any evaluation of a variant. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
For missense variants: REVEL ≥ 0.7. For splicing impact, predicted outcome must match disease mechanism.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Instructions:
Multiple lines of computational evidence support a deleterious effect on the gene or gene product (conservation, evolutionary, splicing impact, etc.). Not Applicable
|
||||
PP4 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Patient’s phenotype or family history is highly specific for a disease with a single genetic etiology.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Not Applicable
Comments:
Not applicable, see PS4.
|
||||
PP5 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Reputable source recently reports variant as pathogenic, but the evidence is not available to the laboratory to perform an independent evaluation.
Not Applicable
This criterion is not for use as recommended by the ClinGen Sequence Variant Interpretation VCEP Review Committee.
PubMed : 29543229
|
||||
BA1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Allele frequency is above 5% in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes or Exome Aggregation Consortium.
Stand Alone
GnomAD filtering allele frequency ≥0.05%.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Instructions:
Allele frequency is above 5% in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes or Exome Aggregation Consortium. Not Applicable
Comments:
An allele frequency ≥0.05% was approved. See supplemental material for additional frequency information.
|
||||
BS1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Allele frequency is greater than expected for disorder.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
GnomAD filtering allele frequency ≥0.025%.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Moderate
Supporting
Instructions:
Allele frequency is greater than expected for disorder. Not Applicable
Comments:
An allele frequency ≥0.025% was approved. See supplemental material for additional frequency information.
|
||||
BS2 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Observed in a healthy adult individual for a recessive (homozygous), dominant (heterozygous), or X-linked (hemizygous) disorder, with full penetrance expected at an early age.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
-4 Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Moderate
Supporting
-1 Point.
Modification Type:
Strength
Instructions:
Strength adjustment using point-based scoring based on phenotypic specifications. Phenotypic specifications: based on healthy homozygote or heterozygote individuals, reduced points for apparently unaffected heterozygous individuals, applicable to parent or sibling samples during clinical family evaluations. Not Applicable
Comments:
Due to variable expressivity and severity, extensive clinical workup for RASopathy spectrum features is warranted, thus general population data should not be used for this criterion. Clinical laboratories are encouraged to accumulate more than 3 instances of well phenotyped family members before applying this strong criterion.
|
||||
BS3 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Well-established in vitro or in vivo functional studies show no damaging effect on protein function or splicing.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Instructions:
Well-established in vitro or in vivo functional studies show no damaging effect on protein function or splicing. Not Applicable
Comments:
Approved functional studies are available for each individual gene in the supplemental material. Additional functional studies can be submitted to the expert panel for approval.
|
||||
BS4 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Lack of segregation in affected members of a family.
Caveat: The presence of phenocopies for common phenotypes (i.e. cancer, epilepsy) can mimic lack of segregation among affected individuals. Also, families may have more than one pathogenic variant contributing to an autosomal dominant disorder, further confounding an apparent lack of segregation. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Requires only one informative meiosis.
Modification Type:
General recommendation
Moderate
Supporting
Instructions:
Lack of segregation in affected members of a family. Not Applicable
Comments:
Requires only one informative meiosis and does not require an additional piece of supporting evidence to classify variant as likely benign.
|
||||
BP1 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Missense variant in a gene for which primarily truncating variants are known to cause disease.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
This rule has contraindications for use with RASopathies. Given the disease mechanism is gain-of-function for RASopathies, BP1 should be used for any truncating variant (nonsense, frameshift, affects canonical splice sites, initiation codon, entire gene or multi exon deletion) in genes without established LOF correlation to disease. See the supplemental material regarding dosage sensitivity information for each individual gene and potential association to disorders associated with LOF variants.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Instructions:
Missense variant in a gene for which primarily truncating variants are known to cause disease. Not Applicable
Comments:
This rule has contraindications for use with RASopathies. Given the disease mechanism is gain-of-function for RASopathies, BP1 should be used for any truncating variant (nonsense, frameshift, affects canonical splice sites, initiation codon, entire gene or multi exon deletion) in genes without established LOF correlation to disease. See the supplemental material regarding dosage sensitivity information for each individual gene and potential association to disorders associated with LOF variants.
|
||||
BP2 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Observed in trans with a pathogenic variant for a fully penetrant dominant gene/disorder or observed in cis with a pathogenic variant in any inheritance pattern.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
≥ (-4) Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Moderate
≥ (-2) Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Supporting
≥ (-1) Point.
Modification Type:
None
Instructions:
Points are awarded for an alternative molecular cause of a RASopathy in the same gene (and/or in conjunction with BP5) and the phenotype is consistent with expected severity of the RASopathy. Not Applicable
|
||||
BP3 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
In frame-deletions/insertions in a repetitive region without a known function.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
Not Applicable
Comments:
No known benign repetitive areas in RASopathy genes.
|
||||
BP4 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Multiple lines of computational evidence suggest no impact on gene or gene product (conservation, evolutionary, splicing impact, etc)
Caveat: As many in silico algorithms use the same or very similar input for their predictions, each algorithm cannot be counted as an independent criterion. BP4 can be used only once in any evaluation of a variant. Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
For missense variants: REVEL ≤0.3.
Modification Type:
Disease-specific
Instructions:
For missense variants: REVEL ≤0.3. For splicing variants: predicted outcome is negligible or does not match disease mechanism. Not Applicable
|
||||
BP5 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Variant found in a case with an alternate molecular basis for disease.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
≥ (-4) Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Moderate
≥ (-2) Points.
Modification Type:
Strength
Supporting
≥ (-1) Point.
Modification Type:
None
Instructions:
Points are awarded for an alternative molecular cause of a RASopathy in a different gene (and/or in conjunction with BP2) and the phenotype is consistent with expected severity of the RASopathy. Points are also awarded for phenotypes inconsistent with a RASopathy and fully explained by a different causative variant (e.g. WES testing). Not Applicable
|
||||
BP6 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
Reputable source recently reports variant as benign, but the evidence is not available to the laboratory to perform an independent evaluation.
Not Applicable
This criterion is not for use as recommended by the ClinGen Sequence Variant Interpretation VCEP Review Committee.
PubMed : 29543229
|
||||
BP7 | ||||
Original ACMG Summary
A synonymous variant for which splicing prediction algorithms predict no impact to the splice consensus sequence nor the creation of a new splice site AND the nucleotide is not highly conserved.
Stand Alone
Very Strong
Strong
Moderate
Supporting
A synonymous (silent) variant for which splicing prediction algorithms predict no impact to the splice consensus sequence nor the creation of a new splice site AND the nucleotide is not highly conserved. This rule is also applicable for intronic positions (except canonical splice sites) or non-coding variants and should be used in conjunction with BP4.
Modification Type:
General recommendation
Instructions:
A synonymous variant for which splicing prediction algorithms predict no impact to the splice consensus sequence nor the creation of a new splice site AND the nucleotide is not highly conserved. Not Applicable
Comments:
This rule is also applicable for intronic positions (except canonical splice sites) or non-coding variants and should be used in conjunction with BP4.
|
One Baylor Plaza, MS:BCM225 Suite 400D, Houston, TX, 77030
Questions or comments?