Cargando…
Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments
BACKGROUND: Deep mutational scanning (DMS) studies exploit the mutational landscape of sequence variation by systematically and comprehensively assaying the effect of single amino acid variants (SAVs; also referred to as missense mutations, or non-synonymous Single Nucleotide Variants – missense SNV...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7077003/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32183714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3439-4 |
_version_ | 1783507339228217344 |
---|---|
author | Reeb, Jonas Wirth, Theresa Rost, Burkhard |
author_facet | Reeb, Jonas Wirth, Theresa Rost, Burkhard |
author_sort | Reeb, Jonas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Deep mutational scanning (DMS) studies exploit the mutational landscape of sequence variation by systematically and comprehensively assaying the effect of single amino acid variants (SAVs; also referred to as missense mutations, or non-synonymous Single Nucleotide Variants – missense SNVs or nsSNVs) for particular proteins. We assembled SAV annotations from 22 different DMS experiments and normalized the effect scores to evaluate variant effect prediction methods. Three trained on traditional variant effect data (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, SNAP2), a regression method optimized on DMS data (Envision), and a naïve prediction using conservation information from homologs. RESULTS: On a set of 32,981 SAVs, all methods captured some aspects of the experimental effect scores, albeit not the same. Traditional methods such as SNAP2 correlated slightly more with measurements and better classified binary states (effect or neutral). Envision appeared to better estimate the precise degree of effect. Most surprising was that the simple naïve conservation approach using PSI-BLAST in many cases outperformed other methods. All methods captured beneficial effects (gain-of-function) significantly worse than deleterious (loss-of-function). For the few proteins with multiple independent experimental measurements, experiments differed substantially, but agreed more with each other than with predictions. CONCLUSIONS: DMS provides a new powerful experimental means of understanding the dynamics of the protein sequence space. As always, promising new beginnings have to overcome challenges. While our results demonstrated that DMS will be crucial to improve variant effect prediction methods, data diversity hindered simplification and generalization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7077003 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70770032020-03-18 Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments Reeb, Jonas Wirth, Theresa Rost, Burkhard BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Deep mutational scanning (DMS) studies exploit the mutational landscape of sequence variation by systematically and comprehensively assaying the effect of single amino acid variants (SAVs; also referred to as missense mutations, or non-synonymous Single Nucleotide Variants – missense SNVs or nsSNVs) for particular proteins. We assembled SAV annotations from 22 different DMS experiments and normalized the effect scores to evaluate variant effect prediction methods. Three trained on traditional variant effect data (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, SNAP2), a regression method optimized on DMS data (Envision), and a naïve prediction using conservation information from homologs. RESULTS: On a set of 32,981 SAVs, all methods captured some aspects of the experimental effect scores, albeit not the same. Traditional methods such as SNAP2 correlated slightly more with measurements and better classified binary states (effect or neutral). Envision appeared to better estimate the precise degree of effect. Most surprising was that the simple naïve conservation approach using PSI-BLAST in many cases outperformed other methods. All methods captured beneficial effects (gain-of-function) significantly worse than deleterious (loss-of-function). For the few proteins with multiple independent experimental measurements, experiments differed substantially, but agreed more with each other than with predictions. CONCLUSIONS: DMS provides a new powerful experimental means of understanding the dynamics of the protein sequence space. As always, promising new beginnings have to overcome challenges. While our results demonstrated that DMS will be crucial to improve variant effect prediction methods, data diversity hindered simplification and generalization. BioMed Central 2020-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7077003/ /pubmed/32183714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3439-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Reeb, Jonas Wirth, Theresa Rost, Burkhard Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title | Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title_full | Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title_fullStr | Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title_full_unstemmed | Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title_short | Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
title_sort | variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7077003/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32183714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3439-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT reebjonas varianteffectpredictionscapturesomeaspectsofdeepmutationalscanningexperiments AT wirththeresa varianteffectpredictionscapturesomeaspectsofdeepmutationalscanningexperiments AT rostburkhard varianteffectpredictionscapturesomeaspectsofdeepmutationalscanningexperiments |