Table 4 Summary of clinical approaches.

From: Reducing Sanger confirmation testing through false positive prediction algorithms

Category

All variants

GIAB benchmark only

Nonactionable only

GIAB benchmark + nonactionable only

Risk of reporting false positive

Higher

Lower

Higher

Lower

Risk of adverse impact on patient care

Higher

Higher

Lower

Lower

Not eligible—no passing model

6

6

6

6

Not eligible—outside benchmark region AND actionable

N/A

N/A

N/A

4

Not eligible—actionable

N/A

N/A

48

44

Not eligible—outside benchmark region

N/A

88

N/A

84

Eligible—predicted true

240

164

216

141

Eligible—predicted false

60

48

36

27

Confirmation order rate

21.57%

46.41%

29.41%

53.92%

  1. This table summarizes the prospective results for all variants (n = 306) under different clinical approaches. The methods are organized from highest risk of reporting a false positive to lowest, where reporting actionable variants without confirmation is considered highest risk. Approaches that allow the models to be applied to any variant interpretation (specifically primary or actionable) have a higher risk for adverse impact on patient care. Approaches that allow for variants from any genomic region (specifically outside Genome in a Bottle [GIAB] benchmark regions) have a higher risk of reporting a false positive. Variants that are classified as “not eligible” either did not have a validated model or require confirmation test due to the approach. Confirmation order rate is the percentage of variants that are either not eligible or predicted false, indicating that a confirmation test would be ordered for that variant prior to reporting. The results from our clinical approach (nonactionable only) are emphasized.