rewire.itbenchmarks
Configuration

ACMG/AMP classification system with SVI recommendations (t2)

Standard ACMG/AMP classification system applied with current Sequence Variant Interpretation (SVI) recommendations and newly available annotation data, re-evaluating the same VUS cohort.

1 evaluation · 2 results

Overview

Standard ACMG/AMP classification system applied with current Sequence Variant Interpretation (SVI) recommendations and newly available annotation data, re-evaluating the same VUS cohort.

Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.

Evaluations and results

1 evaluation · 2 results. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Filter evaluations

Applied filters: All linked evaluations

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configurationProtocol and datasetFindingEvidence and details
Configuration: ACMG/AMP classification system with SVI recommendations (t2)Protocol: Benet-Pages BRCA1/BRCA2 VUS reclassification: ACMG/AMP + SVI step (t2)
Dataset: Benet-Pages 2025 BRCA1/BRCA2 VUS reclassification cohort
24 reclassified_to_lb_count
count · unknown

Uncertainty: Not reported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Author-reported evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

Benet-Pages t2 (ACMG/AMP + SVI) reclassification of the 121-variant VUS cohort

Not reported

Aggregation: Not reported

Reclassification of VUS in BRCA1 and BRCA2 using the new BRCA1/BRCA2 ENIGMA track set demonstrates the superiority of ClinGen ENIGMA Expert Panel specifications over the standard ACMG/AMP classification system · Results, "Reclassification of variants using the ACMG/AMP classification system with SVI recommendations and new data (ACMG/AMP + SVI)": "Of 121 VUS, 20% (n = 24) were reclassified as LB..."
Configuration: ACMG/AMP classification system with SVI recommendations (t2)Protocol: Benet-Pages BRCA1/BRCA2 VUS reclassification: ACMG/AMP + SVI step (t2)
Dataset: Benet-Pages 2025 BRCA1/BRCA2 VUS reclassification cohort
20% reclassified_to_lb_fraction
percent · higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Author-reported evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

Benet-Pages t2 (ACMG/AMP + SVI) reclassification of the 121-variant VUS cohort

Not reported

Aggregation: Not reported

Reclassification of VUS in BRCA1 and BRCA2 using the new BRCA1/BRCA2 ENIGMA track set demonstrates the superiority of ClinGen ENIGMA Expert Panel specifications over the standard ACMG/AMP classification system · Results, "Reclassification of variants using the ACMG/AMP classification system with SVI recommendations and new data (ACMG/AMP + SVI)": "Of 121 VUS, 20% (n = 24) were reclassified as LB..."

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-10-06-fea06f63ac0e.

Use this model

How it works, versions and access
Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions

Evidence

Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.

Evidence table

Inspect claims, sources and review details

Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.

One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.

0 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-06-fea06f63ac0e
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance

No evidence rows match these filters. Choose another scope or clear the search.

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-10-06-fea06f63ac0e · Record review: source checked

1 source records and release historyDownload this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: uc-clinical-20261005-benet-pages-acmg-svi-config

areas
dna-genomes
contexts
clinical_research
review
method: automated_source_review; reviewer: Claude Sonnet clinical coverage worker (research-evidence intake); date: 2026-10-05; note: Transcription from inspected primary source. No execution, independent replication or human scientific review.; source id: uc-clinical-20261005-source-benet-pages
Related records

Suggest a correction