Systematic re-evaluation of SCN5A variants associated with Brugada syndrome.


Journal

Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2019
Historique:
received: 27 04 2018
revised: 01 09 2018
accepted: 07 09 2018
pubmed: 12 9 2018
medline: 15 1 2020
entrez: 12 9 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

A large number of SCN5A variants have been reported to underlie Brugada syndrome (BrS). However, the evidence supporting individual variants is highly heterogeneous. We systematically re-evaluated all SCN5A variants reported in BrS using the 2015 American college of medical genetics and genomics and the association for molecular pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines. A PubMed/Embase search was performed to identify all reported SCN5A variants in BrS. Standardized bioinformatic re-analysis (SIFT, PolyPhen, Mutation Taster, Mutation assessor, FATHMM, GERP, PhyloP, and SiPhy) and re-evaluation of frequency in the gnomAD database were performed. Fourteen ACMG-AMP rules were deemed applicable for SCN5A variant analysis. Four hundred and eighty unique SCN5A variants were identified, the majority of which 425 (88%) were coding variants. One hundred and fifty-six of 425 (37%) variants were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic. Two hundred and fifty-eight (60%) were classified as variants of uncertain significance, while a further 11 (3%) were classified as benign/likely benign. When considering the subset of variants that were considered "null" variants separately, 95% fulfilled criteria for pathogenicity/likely pathogenicity. In contrast, only 17% of missense variants fulfilled criteria for pathogenicity/likely pathogenicity. Importantly, however, only 25% of missense variants had available functional data, which was a major score driver for pathogenic classification. Based on contemporary ACMG-AMP guidelines, only a minority of SCN5A variants implicated in BrS fulfill the criteria for pathogenicity or likely pathogenicity.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
A large number of SCN5A variants have been reported to underlie Brugada syndrome (BrS). However, the evidence supporting individual variants is highly heterogeneous.
OBJECTIVE
We systematically re-evaluated all SCN5A variants reported in BrS using the 2015 American college of medical genetics and genomics and the association for molecular pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines.
METHODS
A PubMed/Embase search was performed to identify all reported SCN5A variants in BrS. Standardized bioinformatic re-analysis (SIFT, PolyPhen, Mutation Taster, Mutation assessor, FATHMM, GERP, PhyloP, and SiPhy) and re-evaluation of frequency in the gnomAD database were performed. Fourteen ACMG-AMP rules were deemed applicable for SCN5A variant analysis.
RESULTS
Four hundred and eighty unique SCN5A variants were identified, the majority of which 425 (88%) were coding variants. One hundred and fifty-six of 425 (37%) variants were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic. Two hundred and fifty-eight (60%) were classified as variants of uncertain significance, while a further 11 (3%) were classified as benign/likely benign. When considering the subset of variants that were considered "null" variants separately, 95% fulfilled criteria for pathogenicity/likely pathogenicity. In contrast, only 17% of missense variants fulfilled criteria for pathogenicity/likely pathogenicity. Importantly, however, only 25% of missense variants had available functional data, which was a major score driver for pathogenic classification.
CONCLUSION
Based on contemporary ACMG-AMP guidelines, only a minority of SCN5A variants implicated in BrS fulfill the criteria for pathogenicity or likely pathogenicity.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30203441
doi: 10.1111/jce.13740
doi:

Substances chimiques

NAV1.5 Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel 0
SCN5A protein, human 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

118-127

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Auteurs

Nathan C Denham (NC)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Charles M Pearman (CM)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Wern Yew Ding (WY)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Johan Waktare (J)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Dhiraj Gupta (D)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Richard Snowdon (R)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Mark Hall (M)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Robert Cooper (R)

Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Simon Modi (S)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Derick Todd (D)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Saagar Mahida (S)

Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Inherited Cardiac Diseases, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH