ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Evaluation of BoostDM, a somatic variant prediction tool, for the interpretation of germline variants in hereditary cancer genes.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Coding or non-coding? The question behind sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Classifying germline variants in hereditary cancer genes remains challenging and requires integrating diverse lines of evidence. BoostDM is a computational method originally developed to identify somatic cancer driver mutations by detecting signals of positive selection. Given the functional overlap between somatic and germline pathogenic variants in cancer genes, we evaluated the utility of BoostDM for interpreting germline variants in hereditary cancer genes. We assessed BoostDM's performance across six genes with dual roles in sporadic and hereditary cancer (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PTEN, TP53), using gene-specific BoostDM models. A total of 1275 germline single nucleotide variants with expert-reviewed pathogenic and benign classifications were included. BoostDM scores were compared to those from AlphaMissense and REVEL, two leading pathogenicity predictors for missense variants. BoostDM correctly classified 74.5% of pathogenic/likely pathogenic and 98.6% of non-synonymous benign/likely benign variants overall. It performed particularly well for non-synonymous, non-missense variants (92.3% sensitivity). For missense variants, BoostDM correctly identified 46% of pathogenic and 95.5% of benign variants. While BoostDM did not outperform AlphaMissense or REVEL, it demonstrated high specificity (99.5%) and positive predictive value (PPV = 98%) for missense variants with high scores ( > 0.5). Gene-specific performance varied, with TP53 showing the most robust results. In conclusion, BoostDM predictions are not a replacement for ACMG/AMP-guided germline variant classification, especially for missense changes. However, its high specificity and PPV suggest that high BoostDM scores can provide supportive evidence of pathogenicity, prompting further clinical and functional investigation.
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.