ArticleGenome research2019
Genetic variant pathogenicity prediction trained using disease-specific clinical sequencing data sets.
Article in Genome research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantic embedding of variant effect annotations enables rapid and accurate pathogenicity prediction with VUS.Life.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Machine Learning in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy: Phenotyping, Mechanism Discovery, and Clinical Applications.Cardiology in review · 2026Article
- Disease- and gene-specific deep learning for pathogenicity prediction of rare missense variants in cancer predisposition genes.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Expanding the utility of variant effect predictions with phenotype-specific models.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Increasing pathogenic germline variant diagnosis rates in precision medicine: current best practices and future opportunities.Human genomics · 2025Review
- BRCA-CN: a blockchain-based framework to support public variant databases sharing in multi-center community for diagnostic reference and China regulatory science.Human genetics · 2025Article
- Structural mapping of patient-associated KCNMA1 gene variants.Biophysical journal · 2024Article
- MmisAT and MmisP: an efficient and accurate suite of variant analysis toolkit for primary mitochondrial diseases.Human genomics · 2023Article
- Gene-specific machine learning for pathogenicity prediction of rare BRCA1 and BRCA2 missense variants.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Mapping the Constrained Coding Regions in the Human Genome to Their Corresponding Proteins.Journal of molecular biology · 2023Article
- Statistical models of the genetic etiology of congenital heart disease.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2022Review
- Evaluating the impact of in silico predictors on clinical variant classification.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Article
- DVPred: a disease-specific prediction tool for variant pathogenicity classification for hearing loss.Human genetics · 2022Article
- VPMBench: a test bench for variant prioritization methods.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- A domain damage index to prioritizing the pathogenicity of missense variants.Human mutation · 2021Article
- Unified inference of missense variant effects and gene constraints in the human genome.PLoS genetics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in DNA sequencing have expanded our understanding of the molecular basis of genetic disorders and increased the utilization of clinical genomic tests. Given the paucity of evidence to accurately classify each variant and the difficulty of experimentally evaluating its clinical significance, a large number of variants generated by clinical tests are reported as variants of unknown clinical significance. Population-scale variant databases can improve clinical interpretation. Specifically, pathogenicity prediction for novel missense variants can use features describing regional variant constraint. Constrained genomic regions are those that have an unusually low variant count in the general population. Computational methods have been introduced to capture these regions and incorporate them into pathogenicity classifiers, but these methods have yet to be compared on an independent clinical variant data set. Here, we introduce one variant data set derived from clinical sequencing panels and use it to compare the ability of different genomic constraint metrics to determine missense variant pathogenicity. This data set is compiled from 17,071 patients surveyed with clinical genomic sequencing for cardiomyopathy, epilepsy, or RASopathies. We further use this data set to demonstrate the necessity of disease-specific classifiers and to train PathoPredictor, a disease-specific ensemble classifier of pathogenicity based on regional constraint and variant-level features. PathoPredictor achieves an average precision >90% for variants from all 99 tested disease genes while approaching 100% accuracy for some genes. The accumulation of larger clinical variant training data sets can significantly enhance their performance in a disease- and gene-specific manner.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.