ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Evaluating variant pathogenicity prediction tools to establish African inclusive guidelines for germline genetic testing.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Africa's emerging role in precision oncology: translational insights from the harnessing functional genomics in cancer research conference, Windhoek, 23-26 September 2025.BMC proceedings · 2026Article
- Article
- Common and rare variant genetic contributions in African Americans with autism.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenetic germline testing is restricted for African patients. Lack of ancestrally relevant genomic data perpetuated by African diversity has resulted in European-biased curated clinical variant databases and pathogenic prediction guidelines. While numerous variant pathogenicity prediction tools (VPPTs) exist, their performance has yet to be established within the context of African diversity.
methodsTo address this limitation, we assessed 54 VPPTs for predictive performance (sensitivity, specificity, false positive and negative rates) across 145,291 known pathogenic or benign variants derived from 50 Southern African and 50 European men matched for advanced prostate cancer. Prioritising VPPTs for optimal ancestral performance, we screened 5.3 million variants of unknown significance for predicted functional and oncogenic potential.
resultsWe observe a 2.1- and 4.1-fold increase in the number of known and predicted rare pathogenic or benign variants, respectively, against a 1.6-fold decrease in the number of available interrogated variants in our European over African data. Although sensitivity was significantly lower for our African data overall (0.66 vs 0.71, p = 9.86E-06), MetaSVM, CADD, Eigen-raw, BayesDel-noAF, phyloP100way-vertebrate and MVP outperformed irrespective of ancestry. Conversely, MutationTaster, DANN, LRT and GERP-RS were African-specific top performers, while MutationAssessor, PROVEAN, LIST-S2 and REVEL are European-specific. Using these pathogenic prediction workflows, we narrow the ancestral gap for potentially deleterious and oncogenic variant prediction in favour of our African data by 1.15- and 1.1-fold, respectively.
conclusionAlthough VPPT sensitivity favours European data, our findings provide guidelines for VPPT selection to maximise rare pathogenic variant prediction for African disease studies.
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.