Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Center for Precision Health Research, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Am J Hum Genet. 2024 Sep 5;111(9):1810-1818. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.07.019.
A core task when establishing the strength of evidence for a gene's role in a monogenic disorder is determining the appropriate disease entity to curate. Establishing this concept determines which evidence can be applied and quantified toward the final gene-disease validity, variant pathogenicity, or actionability classification. Genes with implications in more than one phenotype can necessitate a process of lumping and splitting, disease reorganization, and updates to disease nomenclature. Reappraisal of the names that are used as labels for disease entities is therefore a necessary and perpetual process. The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen), in collaboration with representatives from Monarch Disease Ontology (Mondo) and Online Inheritance in Man (OMIM), formed the Disease Naming Advisory Committee (DNAC) to develop guidance for groups faced with the need to establish the "curated disease entity" for gene-phenotype validity and variant pathogenicity and to update disease names for clinical use when necessary. The objective of this group was to harmonize guidance for disease naming across these nosologic entities and among ClinGen curation groups in collaboration with other disease-related professional groups. Here, we present the initial guidance developed by the DNAC with representative examples provided by the ClinGen expert panels and working groups that warranted nomenclature updates. We also discuss the broader implications of these efforts and their benefits for harmonization of gene-disease validity curation. Overall, this work sheds light on current inconsistencies and/or discrepancies and is designed to engage the broader community on how ClinGen defines monogenic disorders using a consistent approach for disease naming.
当确定基因在单基因疾病中的作用的证据强度时,核心任务之一是确定要管理的适当疾病实体。确定这一概念决定了可以应用和量化哪些证据,以最终确定基因-疾病有效性、变异致病性或可操作性分类。涉及多种表型的基因可能需要进行聚类和分裂、疾病重组以及疾病命名法的更新。因此,重新评估作为疾病实体标签的名称是一个必要的、持续的过程。临床基因组资源(ClinGen)与君主疾病本体论(Mondo)和在线人类遗传(OMIM)的代表合作,成立了疾病命名咨询委员会(DNAC),为需要为基因-表型有效性和变异致病性确立“管理疾病实体”以及在必要时更新临床使用的疾病名称的小组提供指导。该小组的目标是协调这些分类实体以及与其他疾病相关专业团体的 ClinGen 管理团体之间的疾病命名指导。在这里,我们展示了由 DNAC 开发的初步指导意见,并提供了由 ClinGen 专家小组和工作组提供的代表性示例,这些示例需要进行命名更新。我们还讨论了这些努力的更广泛影响及其对基因-疾病有效性管理协调的好处。总的来说,这项工作揭示了当前的不一致和/或差异,并旨在让更广泛的社区参与到 ClinGen 如何使用一致的疾病命名方法来定义单基因疾病。