Section 1: Initial Assessment of Genomic Content
|
Evidence Type |
|
Evidence |
Suggested points |
Max Score |
Points Given |
Copy Number Gain Content (For intragenic variants, use section 2I)
|
|
1A. Contains protein-coding or other known functionally important elements |
0 (Continue Evaluation) |
0 |
|
|
1B. Does NOT contain protein-coding or any known functionally important elements |
-0.60 |
-0.60 |
Assigned points: 0
|
Section 2: Overlap with Established Triplosensitive (TS), Haploinsufficient (HI), or Benign Genes or Genomic Regions
Skip to Section 3 if the copy number gain does not overlap these types of genes/regions
|
Overlap with ESTABLISHED TS genes or genomic regions |
|
2A. Complete overlap; the TS gene or minimal critical region is fully contained within the observed copy number gain |
1 |
1 |
|
|
2B. Partial overlap of an established TS region
- The observed CNV does NOT contain the known causative gene or critical region for this established TS genomic region OR
- Unclear if the known causative gene or critical region is affected OR
- No specific causative gene or critical region has been established for this TS genomic region
|
0 (Continue Evaluation) |
0 |
|
Overlap with ESTABLISHED benign copy number gain genes or genomic regions
|
|
2C. Identical in gene content to the established benign copy number gain |
-1 |
-1 |
|
|
2D. Smaller than established benign copy number gain, breakpoint(s) does not interrupt protein-coding genes |
-1 |
-1 |
|
|
2E. Smaller than established benign copy number gain, breakpoint(s) potentially interrupts protein-coding gene
|
0 (Continue Evaluation) |
0 |
|
|
2F. Larger than known benign copy number gain, does not include additional protein-coding genes
|
-0.90 (Range: 0 to -1.00) |
-1 |
|
|
2G. Overlaps a benign copy number gain but includes additional genomic material
|
0 (Continue Evaluation) |
0 |
|
Overlap with ESTABLISHED HI gene(s)1
|
|
2H. HI gene fully contained within observed copy number gain
|
0 (Continue Evaluation) |
0 |
|
Breakpoint(s) within ESTABLISHED HI genes
|
|
2I. Both breakpoints are within the same gene (gene-level sequence variant, possibly resulting in loss of function (LOF))
|
See ClinGen SVI working group PVS1 specifications
PVS1 = 0.90 (Range: 0.45 to 0.90)
PVS1_Strong = 0.45 (Range: 0.30 to 0.90)
N/A = 0 (Continue Evaluation)
|
|
|
|
2J. One breakpoint is within an established HI gene, patient’s phenotype is either inconsistent with what is expected for LOF of that gene OR unknown
|
0 (Continue evaluation)
|
0
|
|
|
2K. One breakpoint is within an established HI gene, patient’s phenotype is highly specific and consistent with what is expected for LOF of that gene
|
0.45
|
0.45
|
|
Breakpoints within other gene(s)
|
|
2L. One or both breakpoints are within gene(s) of no established clinical significance
|
0 (Continue evaluation) |
0 |
|
Section 3: Evaluation of Gene Number
|
Number of protein-coding RefSeq genes wholly or partially included in the copy number gain |
|
|
Select number of genes from the pull-down menu |
Select number of genes from the pull-down menu |
Assigned points: 0
|
Section 4: Detailed Evaluation of Genomic Content Using Published Literature, Public Databases, and/or Internal Lab Data
Note: If there have been no reports associating either the copy number gain or any of the genes therein with human phenotypes caused by triplosensitivity, skip to Section 5.
|
Individual case evidence – de novo occurrences
|
|
Reported proband has either: - complete duplication of one or more genes within the observed copy number gain OR
- an overlapping copy number gain similar in genomic content to the observed copy number gain AND…
|
See categories below
|
|
|
|
4A. …the reported phenotype is highly specific and relatively unique to the gene or genomic region
|
Confirmed de novo: 0.45 points each Assumed de novo: 0.30 points each (Range: 0.15 to 0.45) |
0.90 (Total) |
|
|
4B. …the reported phenotype is consistent with the gene/genomic region, is highly specific, but is not necessarily unique to the gene/genomic region
|
Confirmed de novo: 0.30 points each Assumed de novo: 0.15 points each (Range: 0 to 0.45) |
0.90 (Total) |
|
|
4C. …the reported phenotype is consistent with the gene/genomic region, but not highly specific and/or with high genetic heterogeneity
|
Confirmed de novo: 0.15 point each Assumed de novo: 0.10 points each (Range: 0 to 0.30) |
0.90 (Total) |
|
Individual case evidence - inconsistent phenotype
|
|
4D. …the reported phenotype is NOT consistent with the gene/genomic region or not consistent in general
|
0 points each (Range: 0 to -0.30)
|
-0.30 (total)
|
|
Individual case evidence – unknown inheritance
|
|
4E. Reported proband has a highly specific phenotype consistent with the gene/genomic region, but the inheritance of the variant is unknown.
|
0.10 points each (Range:0-0.15)
|
0.30 (total) |
|
Individual case evidence – segregation among similarly affected family members
|
|
|
Select number of segregations from the pull-down menu |
Select number of segregations from the pull-down menu, |
Assigned points: 0
|
Individual case evidence - Non-Segregations
|
|
4I. Variant is NOT found in another individual in the proband’s family AFFECTED with a consistent, specific, well-defined phenotype (no known phenocopies)
|
-0.45 points per family (Range: 0 to -0.45)
|
-0.90 (Total)
|
|
|
4J. Variant IS found in another individual in the proband’s family UNAFFECTED with the specific, well-defined phenotype observed in the proband
|
-0.30 points per family (Range: 0 to -0.30)
|
-0.90 (Total)
|
|
|
4K. Variant IS found in another individual in the proband’s family UNAFFECTED with the non-specific phenotype observed in the proband
|
-0.15 points per family (Range: 0 to - 0.15)
|
-0.30 (Total)
|
|
Case-Control and Population Evidence
|
|
4L. Statistically significant increase amongst observations in cases (with a consistent, specific, well-defined phenotype) compared to controls
|
0.45 per study (Range: 0 to 0.45 per study) |
0.45 (total) |
|
|
4M. Statistically significant increase amongst observations in cases (with a consistent, non-specific phenotype or unknown phenotype) compared to controls
|
0.30 per study (Range: 0 to 0.30 per study) |
0.45 (total) |
|
|
4N. No statistically significant difference between observations in cases and controls
|
-0.90 per study (Range: 0 to -0.90 per study) |
-0.90 (total) |
|
|
4O. Overlap with common population variation
|
-1.00 per study (Range: 0 to -1.00 per study) |
-1.00 (total) |
|
Section 5: Evaluation of Inheritance Patterns/Family History for Patient Being Studied
|
Observed copy number gain is DE NOVO
|
|
5A. Use appropriate category from de novo scoring section in Section 4.
|
Use de novo scoring categories from Section 4 (4A-4D) to determine score. |
0.45 |
|
Observed copy number gain is INHERITED
|
|
5B. Patient with a specific, well-defined phenotype and no family history. Copy number gain is inherited from an apparently unaffected parent.
|
-0.30 (Range: 0 to -0.45) |
-0.45 |
|
|
5C. Patient with non-specific phenotype and no family history. Copy number gain is inherited from an apparently unaffected parent.
|
-0.15 (Range: 0 to -0.30) |
-0.30 |
|
|
5D. CNV segregates with consistent phenotype observed in the patient’s family
|
Use segregation scoring categories from in Section 4 (4F-4H) to determine score. |
0.45 |
|
Observed copy number gain – Non-SEGREGATIONS
|
|
5E. Use appropriate category from non-segregation section in Section 4.
|
Use non-segregation scoring categories from Section 4 (4I-4K) to determine score. |
-0.45 |
|
|
|
5F. Inheritance information is unavailable or uninformative
|
0 |
0 |
|
|
5G. Inheritance information is unavailable or uninformative. The patient phenotype is non-specific, but is consistent with what has been described in similar cases.
|
0.10 (Range: 0 to 0.15) |
0.15 |
|
|
5H. Inheritance information is unavailable or uninformative. The patient phenotype is highly specific and consistent with what has been described in similar cases.
|
0.15 (Range: 0 to 0.30) |
0.30 |
|