Merge `Qual` and `Callers` cell on cancer SNVs page

[northwestwitch]

This PR adds a functionality or fixes a bug.

• Closes #5044 and closes #5043

Testing on cg-vm1 server (Clinical Genomics Stockholm)

**Prepare for testing** 1. Make sure the PR is pushed and available on [Docker Hub](https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/clinicalgenomics/scout-server-stage) 1. Fist book your testing time using the Pax software available at [https://pax.scilifelab.se/](https://pax.scilifelab.se). The resource you are going to call dibs on is `scout-stage` and the server is `cg-vm1`. 1. `ssh @cg-vm1.scilifelab.se` 1. `sudo -iu hiseq.clinical` 1. `ssh localhost` 1. (optional) Find out which scout branch is currently deployed on cg-vm1: `podman ps` 1. Stop the service with current deployed branch: `systemctl --user stop scout.target` 1. Start the scout service with the branch to test: `systemctl --user start scout@` 1. Make sure the branch is deployed: `systemctl --user status scout.target` 1. After testing is done, repeat procedure at [https://pax.scilifelab.se/](https://pax.scilifelab.se), which will release the allocated resource (`scout-stage`) to be used for testing by other users.

Testing on hasta server (Clinical Genomics Stockholm)

**Prepare for testing** 1. `ssh @hasta.scilifelab.se` 1. Book your testing time using the Pax software. `us; paxa -u -s hasta -r scout-stage`. You can also use the WSGI Pax app available at [https://pax.scilifelab.se/](https://pax.scilifelab.se). 1. (optional) Find out which scout branch is currently deployed on cg-vm1: `conda activate S_scout; pip freeze | grep scout-browser` 1. Deploy the branch to test: `bash /home/proj/production/servers/resources/hasta.scilifelab.se/update-tool-stage.sh -e S_scout -t scout -b ` 1. Make sure the branch is deployed: `us; scout --version` 1. After testing is done, repeat the `paxa` procedure, which will release the allocated resource (`scout-stage`) to be used for testing by other users.

How to test:

1. Check SNV variantS from this case but also other cases, cancer and non-cancer (only SVs in the latter case)

Expected outcome: The functionality should be working Take a screenshot and attach or copy/paste the output.

Review:

• [x] code approved by DNIL
• [x] tests executed by CR

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 84.78%. Comparing base (218cbe6) to head (d5457ea). Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #5045 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 84.78% 84.78% ======================================= Files 323 323 Lines 19432 19432 ======================================= Hits 16475 16475 Misses 2957 2957 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests
• JS Bundle Analysis - Avoid shipping oversized bundles

[sonarcloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[northwestwitch]

Demo case:

Test case on scout-stage:

[northwestwitch]

It gets a little tedious with the redundant PASS and FAIL ones, so checking against that would be an improvement.

You want me to add this check in the PR or it is fine as it is for now? Pehaps we could get some users' feedback afterwards

[dnil]

It gets a little tedious with the redundant PASS and FAIL ones, so checking against that would be an improvement.

You want me to add this check in the PR or it is fine as it is for now? Pehaps we could get some users' feedback afterwards

I think it is tentatively better than main already, so good to merge if you like. If it looks easy and safe to do the check, I'd say do it now while we are thinking about it. But if it gets complicated its fine to leave the extra badges there for a bit.

[northwestwitch]

I think it is tentatively better than main already, so good to merge if you like. If it looks easy and safe to do the check, I'd say do it now while we are thinking about it. But if it gets complicated its fine to leave the extra badges there for a bit.

I'll just merge then. If somebody complains we can fix it