| Literature DB >> 28440912 |
Marco Carraro1, Giovanni Minervini1, Manuel Giollo1,2, Yana Bromberg3,4,5, Emidio Capriotti6, Rita Casadio7, Roland Dunbrack8, Lisa Elefanti9, Pietro Fariselli10, Carlo Ferrari2, Julian Gough11, Panagiotis Katsonis12, Emanuela Leonardi13, Olivier Lichtarge12,14,15,16, Chiara Menin9, Pier Luigi Martelli6, Abhishek Niroula17, Lipika R Pal18, Susanna Repo19, Maria Chiara Scaini9, Mauno Vihinen17, Qiong Wei7, Qifang Xu7, Yuedong Yang20, Yizhou Yin18,21, Jan Zaucha11, Huiying Zhao22, Yaoqi Zhou20, Steven E Brenner23, John Moult18,24, Silvio C E Tosatto1,25.
Abstract
Correct phenotypic interpretation of variants of unknown significance for cancer-associated genes is a diagnostic challenge as genetic screenings gain in popularity in the next-generation sequencing era. The Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation (CAGI) experiment aims to test and define the state of the art of genotype-phenotype interpretation. Here, we present the assessment of the CAGI p16INK4a challenge. Participants were asked to predict the effect on cellular proliferation of 10 variants for the p16INK4a tumor suppressor, a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor encoded by the CDKN2A gene. Twenty-two pathogenicity predictors were assessed with a variety of accuracy measures for reliability in a medical context. Different assessment measures were combined in an overall ranking to provide more robust results. The R scripts used for assessment are publicly available from a GitHub repository for future use in similar assessment exercises. Despite a limited test-set size, our findings show a variety of results, with some methods performing significantly better. Methods combining different strategies frequently outperform simpler approaches. The best predictor, Yang&Zhou lab, uses a machine learning method combining an empirical energy function measuring protein stability with an evolutionary conservation term. The p16INK4a challenge highlights how subtle structural effects can neutralize otherwise deleterious variants.Entities:
Keywords: CAGI experiment; bioinformatics tools; cancer; pathogenicity predictors; variant interpretation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28440912 PMCID: PMC5561474 DOI: 10.1002/humu.23235
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Mutat ISSN: 1059-7794 Impact factor: 4.878