RCV Statement Extensions¶

Overview¶

Schema Reference

For the canonical extension reference tables (extension names, value types, and descriptions), see RCV Statements — Extensions.

RCV aggregate statement records contain extensions arrays at two structural levels — on the top-level Statement and on the classification object. Extensions carry aggregate review status information and classification context that are not part of the GA4GH VA-Spec statement model but are essential for interpreting the aggregation outcome.

RCV extensions follow the same patterns as VCV extensions. The key structural difference is that RCV statements are scoped to a specific condition — the condition reference is on the proposition (via #/condition/ or #/conditionSet/), not embedded in the extensions.

All extensions follow the structure { "name": "<extension_name>", "value": <value> }.

Statement Extensions¶

Extensions on the top-level RCV Statement record.

Extension	Type	Description
`clinvarReviewStatus`	string	The aggregate review status derived from the submission level and aggregation outcome. Same value set as VCV. Always present.

Example¶

[
  { "name": "clinvarReviewStatus", "value": "criteria provided, conflicting classifications" }
]

See VCV Statement Extensions for the full list of review status values.

Classification Extensions¶

Extensions on the classification MappableConcept within the Statement.

Extension	Type	Description
`conflictingExplanation`	string	A formatted breakdown of conflicting classification counts. Present only when the classification is conflicting.

Example¶

A conflicting RCV classification:

{
  "conceptType": "Classification",
  "name": "Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity",
  "extensions": [
    { "name": "conflictingExplanation", "value": "Pathogenic(3); Likely pathogenic(2)" }
  ]
}

Note

The conflictingExplanation extension follows the same rules as VCV — present only when multiple distinct significance values exist for a conflict-detectable proposition type.

SCI Classification Label Format¶

For somatic clinical impact (SCI) propositions, the RCV aggregate classification label includes the tier, assertion type, and clinical significance:

<tier_label> - <assertion_type> - <clinical_significance> (<scv_count>)

Examples:

Tier I - Strong - diagnostic - supports diagnosis (1)
Tier I - Strong - therapeutic - sensitivity/response (2)
Tier II - Potential - prognostic - poor outcome (1)

The condition/tumor name is not included in the classification label because it is already represented in the proposition's objectCondition reference.