Advertisement

Correction: Technical standards for the interpretation and reporting of constitutional copy-number variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen)

      The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0686-8.
      Correction to: Genetics in Medicine (2020) 22:245–257; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0686-8, published online 06 November 2019
      Tabled 1
      Section 5: Evaluation of inheritance pattern/family history for patient being studied
      Observed copy-number loss is de novo5A. Use appropriate category from de novo scoring section in section 4.Use de novo scoring categories from section 4 (4A–4D) to determine score0.45
      Observed copy-number loss is inherited5B. Patient with specific, well-defined phenotype and no family history. CNV is inherited from an apparently unaffected parent.−0.30 (range: 0 to −0.45)−0.45
      5C. Patient with nonspecific phenotype and no family history. CNV is inherited from an apparently unaffected parent.−0.15 (range: 0 to −0.30)−0.30
      5D. CNV segregates with a consistent phenotype observed in the patient’s family.Use segregation scoring categories from section 4 (4F–4H) to determine score0.45
      Observed copy-number loss—nonsegregations5E. Use appropriate category from nonsegregation section in section 4.Use nonsegregation scoring categories from section 4 (4I–4K) to determine score−0.45
      Other5F. Inheritance information is unavailable or uninformative.00
      5G. Inheritance information is unavailable or uninformative. The patient phenotype is nonspecific, 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

      Linked Article