Literature DB >> 31342580

Assessment of predicted enzymatic activity of α-N-acetylglucosaminidase variants of unknown significance for CAGI 2016.

Wyatt T Clark1, Laura Kasak2,3, Constantina Bakolitsa2, Zhiqiang Hu2, Gaia Andreoletti2, Giulia Babbi4, Yana Bromberg5, Rita Casadio4, Roland Dunbrack6, Lukas Folkman7, Colby T Ford8, David Jones9, Panagiotis Katsonis10, Kunal Kundu11,12, Olivier Lichtarge10,13,14,15, Pier L Martelli3, Sean D Mooney16, Conor Nodzak8, Lipika R Pal11, Predrag Radivojac17, Castrense Savojardo4, Xinghua Shi8, Yaoqi Zhou18, Aneeta Uppal8, Qifang Xu6, Yizhou Yin11,12, Vikas Pejaver17,19, Meng Wang20, Liping Wei20, John Moult11,21, Guoying Karen Yu1, Steven E Brenner2, Jonathan H LeBowitz1.   

Abstract

The NAGLU challenge of the fourth edition of the Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation experiment (CAGI4) in 2016, invited participants to predict the impact of variants of unknown significance (VUS) on the enzymatic activity of the lysosomal hydrolase α-N-acetylglucosaminidase (NAGLU). Deficiencies in NAGLU activity lead to a rare, monogenic, recessive lysosomal storage disorder, Sanfilippo syndrome type B (MPS type IIIB). This challenge attracted 17 submissions from 10 groups. We observed that top models were able to predict the impact of missense mutations on enzymatic activity with Pearson's correlation coefficients of up to .61. We also observed that top methods were significantly more correlated with each other than they were with observed enzymatic activity values, which we believe speaks to the importance of sequence conservation across the different methods. Improved functional predictions on the VUS will help population-scale analysis of disease epidemiology and rare variant association analysis.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CAGI; Sanfilippo syndrome; critical assessment; enzymatic activity; machine learning; variants of unknown significance; α-N-acetylglucosaminidase, NAGLU

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31342580      PMCID: PMC7156275          DOI: 10.1002/humu.23875

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Mutat        ISSN: 1059-7794            Impact factor:   4.878


  32 in total

1.  EASE-MM: Sequence-Based Prediction of Mutation-Induced Stability Changes with Feature-Based Multiple Models.

Authors:  Lukas Folkman; Bela Stantic; Abdul Sattar; Yaoqi Zhou
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 2.  Functional assays for BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Authors:  Marcelo A Carvalho; Fergus J Couch; Alvaro N A Monteiro
Journal:  Int J Biochem Cell Biol       Date:  2006-08-18       Impact factor: 5.085

3.  Structural characterization of the α-N-acetylglucosaminidase, a key enzyme in the pathogenesis of Sanfilippo syndrome B.

Authors:  Gabriel Birrane; Anne-Laure Dassier; Alla Romashko; Dianna Lundberg; Kevin Holmes; Thomas Cottle; Angela W Norton; Bohong Zhang; Michael F Concino; Muthuraman Meiyappan
Journal:  J Struct Biol       Date:  2019-02-23       Impact factor: 2.867

4.  Processing of mutant N-acetyl-α-glucosaminidase in mucopolysaccharidosis type IIIB fibroblasts cultured at low temperature.

Authors:  O L M Meijer; H Te Brinke; R Ofman; L IJlst; F A Wijburg; N van Vlies
Journal:  Mol Genet Metab       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 4.797

5.  Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution.

Authors:  R Grantham
Journal:  Science       Date:  1974-09-06       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 6.  Sanfilippo syndrome: Overall review.

Authors:  Fernando Andrade; Luis Aldámiz-Echevarría; Marta Llarena; María Luz Couce
Journal:  Pediatr Int       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.524

7.  Prediction of phenotypes of missense mutations in human proteins from biological assemblies.

Authors:  Qiong Wei; Qifang Xu; Roland L Dunbrack
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2012-11-05

Review 8.  How close are we to therapies for Sanfilippo disease?

Authors:  Lidia Gaffke; Karolina Pierzynowska; Ewa Piotrowska; Grzegorz Węgrzyn
Journal:  Metab Brain Dis       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 3.584

9.  Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans.

Authors:  Monkol Lek; Konrad J Karczewski; Eric V Minikel; Kaitlin E Samocha; Eric Banks; Timothy Fennell; Anne H O'Donnell-Luria; James S Ware; Andrew J Hill; Beryl B Cummings; Taru Tukiainen; Daniel P Birnbaum; Jack A Kosmicki; Laramie E Duncan; Karol Estrada; Fengmei Zhao; James Zou; Emma Pierce-Hoffman; Joanne Berghout; David N Cooper; Nicole Deflaux; Mark DePristo; Ron Do; Jason Flannick; Menachem Fromer; Laura Gauthier; Jackie Goldstein; Namrata Gupta; Daniel Howrigan; Adam Kiezun; Mitja I Kurki; Ami Levy Moonshine; Pradeep Natarajan; Lorena Orozco; Gina M Peloso; Ryan Poplin; Manuel A Rivas; Valentin Ruano-Rubio; Samuel A Rose; Douglas M Ruderfer; Khalid Shakir; Peter D Stenson; Christine Stevens; Brett P Thomas; Grace Tiao; Maria T Tusie-Luna; Ben Weisburd; Hong-Hee Won; Dongmei Yu; David M Altshuler; Diego Ardissino; Michael Boehnke; John Danesh; Stacey Donnelly; Roberto Elosua; Jose C Florez; Stacey B Gabriel; Gad Getz; Stephen J Glatt; Christina M Hultman; Sekar Kathiresan; Markku Laakso; Steven McCarroll; Mark I McCarthy; Dermot McGovern; Ruth McPherson; Benjamin M Neale; Aarno Palotie; Shaun M Purcell; Danish Saleheen; Jeremiah M Scharf; Pamela Sklar; Patrick F Sullivan; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Ming T Tsuang; Hugh C Watkins; James G Wilson; Mark J Daly; Daniel G MacArthur
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  CADD: predicting the deleteriousness of variants throughout the human genome.

Authors:  Philipp Rentzsch; Daniela Witten; Gregory M Cooper; Jay Shendure; Martin Kircher
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  4 in total

1.  Whole-exome sequencing analysis in a case of primary congenital glaucoma due to the partial uniparental isodisomy.

Authors:  Parisima Ghaffarian Zavarzadeh; Morteza Bonyadi; Zahra Abedi
Journal:  Genomics Inform       Date:  2022-09-30

Review 2.  Monogenic causes of non-obstructive azoospermia: challenges, established knowledge, limitations and perspectives.

Authors:  Laura Kasak; Maris Laan
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2020-01-18       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 3.  Genome interpretation using in silico predictors of variant impact.

Authors:  Panagiotis Katsonis; Kevin Wilhelm; Amanda Williams; Olivier Lichtarge
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 5.881

4.  Crowdsourcing assessment of maternal blood multi-omics for predicting gestational age and preterm birth.

Authors:  Adi L Tarca; Bálint Ármin Pataki; Roberto Romero; Marina Sirota; Yuanfang Guan; Rintu Kutum; Nardhy Gomez-Lopez; Bogdan Done; Gaurav Bhatti; Thomas Yu; Gaia Andreoletti; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Sonia S Hassan; Chaur-Dong Hsu; Nima Aghaeepour; Gustavo Stolovitzky; Istvan Csabai; James C Costello
Journal:  Cell Rep Med       Date:  2021-06-15
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.