Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: restrict upgrade/downgrade of AMCG seqvar criteria (#291) #321

Merged

Conversation

holtgrewe
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@holtgrewe holtgrewe linked an issue Dec 21, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@holtgrewe holtgrewe marked this pull request as draft December 21, 2023 15:09
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 21, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (223d904) 75.63% compared to head (64825ef) 75.66%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #321      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.63%   75.66%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         170      170              
  Lines        6627     6636       +9     
  Branches     1464     1463       -1     
==========================================
+ Hits         5012     5021       +9     
  Misses       1428     1428              
  Partials      187      187              
Files Coverage Δ
...ents/SeqvarDetails/ClinsigCard/CriterionSwitch.vue 78.57% <ø> (-0.74%) ⬇️
frontend/src/lib/acmgSeqVar.ts 97.82% <100.00%> (+0.12%) ⬆️

@holtgrewe holtgrewe marked this pull request as ready for review December 21, 2023 15:37
@holtgrewe holtgrewe merged commit fabc262 into main Dec 21, 2023
9 checks passed
@holtgrewe holtgrewe deleted the 291-restrict-the-upgradingdowngrading-of-acmg-seqvar-criteria branch December 21, 2023 15:51
Copy link
Member

@xiamaz xiamaz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please adjust BP7, otherwise LGTM

AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicVeryStrong,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicStrong,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicModerate,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicSupporting
]

/** Array of benign evidence levels. */
const ACMG_EVIDENCE_LEVELS_BENIGN = [
export const ACMG_EVIDENCE_LEVELS_BENIGN = [
AcmgEvidenceLevel.BenignStandalone,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.BenignStrong,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

BenignModerate is missing

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed in resolution of #324.

const ACMG_EVIDENCE_LEVELS_PATHOGENIC_VS_S_M = [
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicVeryStrong,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicStrong,
AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicModerate
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are you defining these in separate arrays?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This makes it a bit easier to read where they are used in my opinion.

(e.g., active site of an enzyme) without benign variation.`
description: `Located in a mutational hot spot and/or critical and well-established functional domain
(e.g., active site of an enzyme) without benign variation.`,
evidenceLevels: ACMG_EVIDENCE_LEVELS_PATHOGENIC_S_M_P
},
{
criteria: AcmgCriteria.PM2,
defaultEvidenceLevel: AcmgEvidenceLevel.PathogenicModerate,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Below only supporting allowed. As long as you only use defaultEvidenceLevel for grouping and sorting, this should be fine.

},
{
criteria: AcmgCriteria.BP7,
defaultEvidenceLevel: AcmgEvidenceLevel.BenignSupporting,
label: 'BP7',
hint: 'silent, no splicing/conservation',
description:
'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'
'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',
evidenceLevels: ACMG_EVIDENCE_LEVELS_BENIGN_P
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In newer papers can be more flexibly set to BS, BM or BP

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Restrict the upgrading/downgrading of ACMG seqvar criteria
2 participants