Cargando…

How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?

Computational tools are widely used for interpreting variants detected in sequencing projects. The choice of these tools is critical for reliable variant impact interpretation for precision medicine and should be based on systematic performance assessment. The performance of the methods varies widel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Niroula, Abhishek, Vihinen, Mauno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6386394/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30742610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006481
_version_ 1783397376690487296
author Niroula, Abhishek
Vihinen, Mauno
author_facet Niroula, Abhishek
Vihinen, Mauno
author_sort Niroula, Abhishek
collection PubMed
description Computational tools are widely used for interpreting variants detected in sequencing projects. The choice of these tools is critical for reliable variant impact interpretation for precision medicine and should be based on systematic performance assessment. The performance of the methods varies widely in different performance assessments, for example due to the contents and sizes of test datasets. To address this issue, we obtained 63,160 common amino acid substitutions (allele frequency ≥1% and <25%) from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database, which contains variants from 60,706 genomes or exomes. We evaluated the specificity, the capability to detect benign variants, for 10 variant interpretation tools. In addition to overall specificity of the tools, we tested their performance for variants in six geographical populations. PON-P2 had the best performance (95.5%) followed by FATHMM (86.4%) and VEST (83.5%). While these tools had excellent performance, the poorest method predicted more than one third of the benign variants to be disease-causing. The results allow choosing reliable methods for benign variant interpretation, for both research and clinical purposes, as well as provide a benchmark for method developers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6386394
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63863942019-03-08 How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants? Niroula, Abhishek Vihinen, Mauno PLoS Comput Biol Research Article Computational tools are widely used for interpreting variants detected in sequencing projects. The choice of these tools is critical for reliable variant impact interpretation for precision medicine and should be based on systematic performance assessment. The performance of the methods varies widely in different performance assessments, for example due to the contents and sizes of test datasets. To address this issue, we obtained 63,160 common amino acid substitutions (allele frequency ≥1% and <25%) from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database, which contains variants from 60,706 genomes or exomes. We evaluated the specificity, the capability to detect benign variants, for 10 variant interpretation tools. In addition to overall specificity of the tools, we tested their performance for variants in six geographical populations. PON-P2 had the best performance (95.5%) followed by FATHMM (86.4%) and VEST (83.5%). While these tools had excellent performance, the poorest method predicted more than one third of the benign variants to be disease-causing. The results allow choosing reliable methods for benign variant interpretation, for both research and clinical purposes, as well as provide a benchmark for method developers. Public Library of Science 2019-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6386394/ /pubmed/30742610 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006481 Text en © 2019 Niroula, Vihinen http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Niroula, Abhishek
Vihinen, Mauno
How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title_full How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title_fullStr How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title_full_unstemmed How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title_short How good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
title_sort how good are pathogenicity predictors in detecting benign variants?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6386394/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30742610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006481
work_keys_str_mv AT niroulaabhishek howgoodarepathogenicitypredictorsindetectingbenignvariants
AT vihinenmauno howgoodarepathogenicitypredictorsindetectingbenignvariants