ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2022
Reanalysis of eMERGE phase III sequence variants in 10,500 participants and infrastructure to support the automated return of knowledge updates.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated reanalysis of genomic data for rare disease diagnostics at scale.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Readiness for Prenatal Genomic Medicine: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Obstetricians' Competence and Attitudes Toward Whole-Exome Sequencing in Xinjiang, China.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Toward universal screening for disease-causing alleles: Mendelian susceptibility to mycobacterial disease as a model.Journal of human immunity · 2025Review
- Using Large Genomic Biobanks to Generate Insights into Genetic Kidney Disease.Seminars in nephrology · 2025Review
- Increasing pathogenic germline variant diagnosis rates in precision medicine: current best practices and future opportunities.Human genomics · 2025Review
- Variant reclassification and recontact research: A scoping review.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- The landscape of reported VUS in multi-gene panel and genomic testing: Time for a change.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2023Article
- Evaluating the association of biallelic OGDHL variants with significant phenotypic heterogeneity.Genome medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnostic yield and clinical relevance of expanded genetic testing for cancer patients.Genome medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe clinical genomics knowledgebase is dynamic with variant classifications changing as newly identified cases, additional population data, and other evidence become available. This is a challenge for the clinical laboratory because of limited resource availability for variant reassessment.
methodsThroughout the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics phase III program, clinical sites associated with the Mass General Brigham/Broad sequencing center received automated, real-time notifications when reported variants were reclassified. In this study, we summarized the nature of these reclassifications and described the proactive reassessment framework we used for the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics program data set to identify variants most likely to undergo reclassification.
resultsReanalysis of 1855 variants led to the reclassification of 2% (n = 45) of variants, affecting 0.6% (n = 67) of participants. Of these reclassifications, 78% (n = 35) were high-impact changes affecting reportability, with 8 variants downgraded from likely pathogenic/pathogenic to variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and 27 variants upgraded from VUS to likely pathogenic/pathogenic. Most upgraded variants (67%) were initially classified as VUS-Favor Pathogenic, highlighting the benefit of VUS subcategorization. The most common reason for reclassification was new published case data and/or functional evidence.
conclusionOur results highlight the importance of periodic sequence variant reevaluation and the need for automated approaches to advance routine implementation of variant reevaluations in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.