Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40597395›Full record

ArticleGenome medicine2025

Understanding how gene-disease relationships can impact clinical utility: adaptations and challenges in hereditary cancer testing.

Jennifer Herrera-Mullar, Carolyn Horton, Amybeth Weaver, Meghan Towne, Jennifer M Huang, Grace E VanNoy, Steven M Harrison, Bess Wayburn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. A NovelCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jennifer Herrera-MullarAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA. jherreramullar@ambrygen.com.
Carolyn HortonAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Amybeth WeaverAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Meghan TowneAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Jennifer M HuangAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Grace E VanNoyAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Steven M HarrisonAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.
Bess WayburnAmbry Genetics, 1 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA, 92656, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDefining gene-disease relationships (GDRs) influences the clinical utility of hereditary cancer predisposition (HCP) multigene panel testing (MGPT) results, as variant classification relies directly on gene-disease characterization. GDR characterization for HCP is challenging due to disease prevalence, incomplete penetrance, and heterogeneity. There is insufficient data showing how gene-disease validity (GDV) scores of HCP genes affect variant classification and how GDV scores change over time. Though these issues determine the results of HCP-MGPT, their impact on short- and long-term clinical utility has not been explored in-depth.

methodsUsing an evidence-based GDV framework, genes were classified into five standardized GDV categories at the time of panel addition. We curated changes in GDV scores and classifications for HCP-MGPT over 7 years. The corresponding impact on the frequency of positive and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) results was evaluated by GDV score.

resultsPositive results were most common in Definitive evidence genes (31.5%), with none in Limited evidence genes (0%). Genes with Definitive GDRs (n = 42) remained Definitive, while most genes with Strong (6/10, 60%) and Moderate (19/24, 80%) GDRs changed categories, 8 (23.5%) of which received a clinically significant GDR downgrade. GDRs associated with low-moderate risk of breast cancer were significantly more likely to be downgraded compared to GDRs associated with rarer, high-penetrance specific phenotypes (p < 0.0001). Downgrades for all GDRs were due to new published data and updates to the GDV framework (77%, 10/13), with 23% (3/13) due to framework updates alone. Including Limited evidence genes on MGPT increased the VUS frequency by 13.7% percentage points.

conclusionsPositive and VUS results varied by GDV category, and Limited evidence genes did not contribute to diagnostic yield. No Limited evidence genes in the category for ≥ 3 years (n = 8) were upgraded, indicating that including these genes on HCP-MGPT provides limited long-term clinical utility. Our data highlight that GDV assessment for HCP requires robust evidence and must account for variable disease penetrance and elevated prevalence in the population. Balancing the availability of a comprehensive gene menu and transparency surrounding clinical utility of novel genes will maximize identification of high-risk patients while reducing the risk of misdiagnosis through clinical false-positive results.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingNeoplasmsHumansPenetranceClinical utilityFamilial cancerGene-disease validityGenetic counselingGenetic testingHereditary cancerMultigene panel testing

Identifiers

PMID40597395
PMCPMC12220650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.