BACKGROUND: Hundreds of nonsynonymous single nucleotide variants (nsSNVs) have been identified in the 2 most common long-QT syndrome-susceptibility genes (KCNQ1 and KCNH2). Unfortunately, an ≈3% BACKGROUND: and KCNH2 nsSNVs amongst healthy individuals complicates the ability to distinguish rare pathogenic mutations from similarly rare yet presumably innocuous variants. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this study, 4 tools [(1) conservation across species, (2) Grantham values, (3) sorting intolerant from tolerant, and (4) polymorphism phenotyping] were used to predict pathogenic or benign status for nsSNVs identified across 388 clinically definite long-QT syndrome cases and 1344 ostensibly healthy controls. From these data, estimated predictive values were determined for each tool independently, in concert with previously published protein topology-derived estimated predictive values, and synergistically when ≥3 tools were in agreement. Overall, all 4 tools displayed a statistically significant ability to distinguish between case-derived and control-derived nsSNVs in KCNQ1, whereas each tool, except Grantham values, displayed a similar ability to differentiate KCNH2 nsSNVs. Collectively, when at least 3 of the 4 tools agreed on the pathogenic status of C-terminal nsSNVs located outside the KCNH2/Kv11.1 cyclic nucleotide-binding domain, the topology-specific estimated predictive value improved from 56% to 91%. CONCLUSIONS: Although in silico prediction tools should not be used to predict independently the pathogenicity of a novel, rare nSNV, our results support the potential clinical use of the synergistic utility of these tools to enhance the classification of nsSNVs, particularly for Kv11.1's difficult to interpret C-terminal region.
BACKGROUND: Hundreds of nonsynonymous single nucleotide variants (nsSNVs) have been identified in the 2 most common long-QT syndrome-susceptibility genes (KCNQ1 and KCNH2). Unfortunately, an ≈3% BACKGROUND: and KCNH2 nsSNVs amongst healthy individuals complicates the ability to distinguish rare pathogenic mutations from similarly rare yet presumably innocuous variants. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this study, 4 tools [(1) conservation across species, (2) Grantham values, (3) sorting intolerant from tolerant, and (4) polymorphism phenotyping] were used to predict pathogenic or benign status for nsSNVs identified across 388 clinically definite long-QT syndrome cases and 1344 ostensibly healthy controls. From these data, estimated predictive values were determined for each tool independently, in concert with previously published protein topology-derived estimated predictive values, and synergistically when ≥3 tools were in agreement. Overall, all 4 tools displayed a statistically significant ability to distinguish between case-derived and control-derived nsSNVs in KCNQ1, whereas each tool, except Grantham values, displayed a similar ability to differentiate KCNH2 nsSNVs. Collectively, when at least 3 of the 4 tools agreed on the pathogenic status of C-terminal nsSNVs located outside the KCNH2/Kv11.1cyclic nucleotide-binding domain, the topology-specific estimated predictive value improved from 56% to 91%. CONCLUSIONS: Although in silico prediction tools should not be used to predict independently the pathogenicity of a novel, rare nSNV, our results support the potential clinical use of the synergistic utility of these tools to enhance the classification of nsSNVs, particularly for Kv11.1's difficult to interpret C-terminal region.
Authors: Jing Ting Zhao; Adam P Hill; Anthony Varghese; Antony A Cooper; Heikki Swan; Päivi J Laitinen-Forsblom; Mark I Rees; Jonathan R Skinner; Terence J Campbell; Jamie I Vandenberg Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2009-04-10
Authors: Philip A Chan; Sekhar Duraisamy; Peter J Miller; Joan A Newell; Carole McBride; Jeffrey P Bond; Tiina Raevaara; Saara Ollila; Minna Nyström; Andrew J Grimm; John Christodoulou; William S Oetting; Marc S Greenblatt Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Michael J Ackerman; Igor Splawski; Jonathan C Makielski; David J Tester; Melissa L Will; Katherine W Timothy; Mark T Keating; Gregg Jones; Monica Chadha; Christopher R Burrow; J Claiborne Stephens; Chuanbo Xu; Richard Judson; Mark E Curran Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Christian Jons; Arthur J Moss; Coeli M Lopes; Scott McNitt; Wojciech Zareba; Ilan Goldenberg; Ming Qi; Arthur A M Wilde; Wataru Shimizu; Jorgen K Kanters; Jeffrey A Towbin; Michael J Ackerman; Jennifer L Robinson Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2009-03-13
Authors: Jamie D Kapplinger; John R Giudicessi; Dan Ye; David J Tester; Thomas E Callis; Carmen R Valdivia; Jonathan C Makielski; Arthur A Wilde; Michael J Ackerman Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Genet Date: 2015-04-22
Authors: Jamie D Kapplinger; Andrew S Tseng; Benjamin A Salisbury; David J Tester; Thomas E Callis; Marielle Alders; Arthur A M Wilde; Michael J Ackerman Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Pradeep Natarajan; Nina B Gold; Alexander G Bick; Heather McLaughlin; Peter Kraft; Heidi L Rehm; Gina M Peloso; James G Wilson; Adolfo Correa; Jonathan G Seidman; Christine E Seidman; Sekar Kathiresan; Robert C Green Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Javad Jabbari; Morten S Olesen; Lei Yuan; Jonas B Nielsen; Bo Liang; Vincenzo Macri; Ingrid E Christophersen; Nikolaj Nielsen; Ahmad Sajadieh; Patrick T Ellinor; Morten Grunnet; Stig Haunsø; Anders G Holst; Jesper H Svendsen; Thomas Jespersen Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Genet Date: 2015-02