Cargando…
Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters
Pathogenicity predictors are computational tools that classify genetic variants as benign or pathogenic; this is currently a major challenge in genomic medicine. With more than fifty such predictors available, selecting the most suitable tool for clinical applications like genetic screening, molecul...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10380979/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37511631 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411872 |
_version_ | 1785080329508225024 |
---|---|
author | Aguirre, Josu Padilla, Natàlia Özkan, Selen Riera, Casandra Feliubadaló, Lídia de la Cruz, Xavier |
author_facet | Aguirre, Josu Padilla, Natàlia Özkan, Selen Riera, Casandra Feliubadaló, Lídia de la Cruz, Xavier |
author_sort | Aguirre, Josu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Pathogenicity predictors are computational tools that classify genetic variants as benign or pathogenic; this is currently a major challenge in genomic medicine. With more than fifty such predictors available, selecting the most suitable tool for clinical applications like genetic screening, molecular diagnostics, and companion diagnostics has become increasingly challenging. To address this issue, we have developed a cost-based framework that naturally considers the various components of the problem. This framework encodes clinical scenarios using a minimal set of parameters and treats pathogenicity predictors as rejection classifiers, a common practice in clinical applications where low-confidence predictions are routinely rejected. We illustrate our approach in four examples where we compare different numbers of pathogenicity predictors for missense variants. Our results show that no single predictor is optimal for all clinical scenarios and that considering rejection yields a different perspective on classifiers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10380979 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103809792023-07-29 Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters Aguirre, Josu Padilla, Natàlia Özkan, Selen Riera, Casandra Feliubadaló, Lídia de la Cruz, Xavier Int J Mol Sci Article Pathogenicity predictors are computational tools that classify genetic variants as benign or pathogenic; this is currently a major challenge in genomic medicine. With more than fifty such predictors available, selecting the most suitable tool for clinical applications like genetic screening, molecular diagnostics, and companion diagnostics has become increasingly challenging. To address this issue, we have developed a cost-based framework that naturally considers the various components of the problem. This framework encodes clinical scenarios using a minimal set of parameters and treats pathogenicity predictors as rejection classifiers, a common practice in clinical applications where low-confidence predictions are routinely rejected. We illustrate our approach in four examples where we compare different numbers of pathogenicity predictors for missense variants. Our results show that no single predictor is optimal for all clinical scenarios and that considering rejection yields a different perspective on classifiers. MDPI 2023-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10380979/ /pubmed/37511631 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411872 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Aguirre, Josu Padilla, Natàlia Özkan, Selen Riera, Casandra Feliubadaló, Lídia de la Cruz, Xavier Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title | Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title_full | Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title_fullStr | Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title_full_unstemmed | Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title_short | Choosing Variant Interpretation Tools for Clinical Applications: Context Matters |
title_sort | choosing variant interpretation tools for clinical applications: context matters |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10380979/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37511631 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411872 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aguirrejosu choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters AT padillanatalia choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters AT ozkanselen choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters AT rieracasandra choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters AT feliubadalolidia choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters AT delacruzxavier choosingvariantinterpretationtoolsforclinicalapplicationscontextmatters |