ArticleJournal of medical genetics2026
Association for Clinical Genomic Science (ACGS) guidelines for the classification of oncogenicity of somatic variants in cancer: recommendations by the UK somatic variant interpretation group (SVIG-UK).
Article in Journal of medical genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Somatic and germline genetic testing pathways in haematological malignancies: Best practice consensus guidelines from the 2025 national meeting organised by UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group.British journal of haematology · 2026Guideline
- Best practice recommendations for bioinformatics approaches applied to high-throughput sequencing for rare disease and cancer diagnosis within the UK National Health Service.Journal of medical genetics · 2026Article
- SNPnexus: an enhanced web platform for large-scale and multi-sample variant analysis (2025 update).Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Leveraging paired germline and somatic analysis to improve the classification of DDX41 variants.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comprehensive genomic testing in routine cancer care pathways has created the need to interpret the consequences of somatic (acquired) genomic variants beyond the currently well-characterised driver variants in cancer gene hotspots. While several guidelines have been published to determine the oncogenicity of somatic cancer gene variants, they lack a comprehensive and flexible approach that encompasses all available lines of evidence. Individual UK laboratories have developed local approaches to standardise somatic variant interpretation, often based on different sets of published guidelines, but a comprehensive national standardised framework is lacking. The absence of standardisation in approaches to somatic variant interpretation highlights a significant gap in the field of genomic medicine within the UK healthcare system. Key stakeholders from across the UK cancer genomics diagnostic community formed the UK Somatic Variant Interpretation Group (SVIG-UK) in September 2018 to develop a consensus approach for interpretation of somatic variants identified through genomic testing in patients with solid tumours and haematological malignancies. SVIG-UK scientists conducted a review of existing somatic variant interpretation classification systems and although they mostly agreed on evidence sources for variant interpretation, differences were identified in how the evidence should be used, weighted and combined. The SVIG-UK team subsequently developed a single, standardised UK-wide approach to somatic variant interpretation which encompassed both solid tumour and haematological cancer genomic testing. This framework was shared with stakeholders across the UK alongside variants for preliminary testing. Outcomes were then reviewed and following engagement sessions across the community, the variant interpretation recommendations were updated and ratified by the UK Association of Clinical Genomics Sciences. We present herein the SVIG-UK framework and recommendations, which provide a standardised, comprehensive and flexible approach for classifying the oncogenicity of somatic variants in cancer genes.
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.