In recent calls, we decided that the mechanism by which an oncogenic variant contributes to disease should be captured as a qualifier on a Variant Oncogenicity Annotation. There was much debate about the choice of terms to use to capture the mechanism. This ticket will hold discussion on this topic.
To summarize briefly: we initially started with the set of terms CIViC uses to capture the outcome of a Biological Assertion: gain of function, loss of function, neomorphic, unaltered function, other . However there is additional nuance/granularity that may be useful to capture that is not reflected in this list. The concepts outlined in Muller's morph classification were highlighted in particular
@arpaddanos agreed to take a pass at defining a set/hierarchy of terms based on these and other sources (e.g. it may be worth looking across existing knowledgebases and cataloging the terms/concepts they use).
In recent calls, we decided that the mechanism by which an oncogenic variant contributes to disease should be captured as a qualifier on a Variant Oncogenicity Annotation. There was much debate about the choice of terms to use to capture the mechanism. This ticket will hold discussion on this topic.
To summarize briefly: we initially started with the set of terms CIViC uses to capture the outcome of a Biological Assertion:
gain of function
,loss of function
,neomorphic
,unaltered function
,other
. However there is additional nuance/granularity that may be useful to capture that is not reflected in this list. The concepts outlined in Muller's morph classification were highlighted in particular@arpaddanos agreed to take a pass at defining a set/hierarchy of terms based on these and other sources (e.g. it may be worth looking across existing knowledgebases and cataloging the terms/concepts they use).