Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39097650›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2024

Assessment of ability of AlphaMissense to identify variants affecting susceptibility to common disease.

David Curtis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The GPCRDiabetologia · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Identification of novelResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Benchmarking AlphaMissense pathogenicity predictions againstBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

David CurtisUCL Genetics Institute, University College London, London, UK. d.curtis@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4089-9183

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important issue in the analysis of rare variant association studies is the ability to annotate nonsynonymous variants in terms of their likely importance as affecting protein function. To address this, AlphaMissense was recently released and was shown to have good performance using benchmarks based on variants causing severe disease and on functional assays. Here, we assess the performance of AlphaMissense across 18 genes which had previously demonstrated association between rare coding variants and hyperlipidaemia, hypertension or type 2 diabetes. The strength of evidence in favour of association, expressed as the signed log p value (SLP), was compared between AlphaMissense and 43 other annotation methods. The results demonstrated marked variability between genes regarding the extent to which nonsynonymous variants contributed to evidence for association and also between the performance of different methods of annotating the nonsynonymous variants. Although AlphaMissense produced the highest SLP on average across genes, it produced the maximum SLP for only 4 genes. For some genes, other methods produced a considerably higher SLP and there were examples of genes where AlphaMissense produced no evidence for association while another method performed well. The marked inconsistency across genes means that it is difficult to decide on an optimal method of analysis of sequence data. The fact that different methods perform well for different genes suggests that if one wished to use sequence data for individual risk prediction then gene-specific annotation methods should be used.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansHyperlipidemiasHypertensionMolecular Sequence AnnotationSoftware

Identifiers

PMID39097650
PMCPMC11576984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.