AlphaMissense is better correlated with functional assays of missense impact than earlier prediction algorithms
Ljungdahl, A.; Kohani, S.; Page, N. F.; Wells, E. S.; Wigdor, E. M.; Dong, S.; Sanders, S. J.
Show abstract
Missense variants that alter a single amino acid in the encoded protein contribute to many human disorders but pose a substantial challenge in interpretation. Though these variants can be reliably identified through sequencing, distinguishing the clinically significant ones remains difficult, such that "Variants of Unknown Significance" outnumber those classified as "Pathogenic" or "Likely Pathogenic." Numerous in silico approaches have been developed to predict the functional impact of missense variants to inform clinical interpretation, the latest being AlphaMissense, which uses artificial intelligence methods trained on predicted protein structure. To independently assess the performance of AlphaMissense and 38 other predictors of missense severity, we compared predictions to data from multiplexed assays of variant effect (MAVE). MAVE experiments generate almost every possible individual amino acid change in a gene and measure their functional impact using a high-throughput assay. Assessing 17,696 variants across five genes (DDX3X, MSH2, PTEN, KCNQ4, and BRCA1), we find that AlphaMissense is consistently one of the top five algorithms based on correlation with functional impact and is the best-correlated algorithm for two genes. We conclude that AlphaMissense represents the current best-in-class predictor by this metric; however, the improvement over other algorithms is modest. We note that multiple missense predictors, including AlphaMissense, appear to overcall variants as pathogenic despite minimal functional impact and that substantially more high-quality training data, including consistently analyzed patient cohorts and MAVE analyses, are required to improve accuracy.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Advanced variant classification framework reduces the false positive rate of predicted loss of function (pLoF) variants in population sequencing data 95%
- Evidence-based calibration of computational tools for missense variant pathogenicity classification and ClinGen recommendations for clinical use of PP3/BP4 criteria 95%
- Evidence-based recommendations for gene-specific ACMG/AMP variant classification from the ClinGen ENIGMA BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variant Curation Expert Panel 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Characteristics predicting reduced penetrance variants in the high-risk cancer predisposition gene TP53 94%
- When splicing is not all or none: Implications for variant classification 93%
- IMPROVE-DD: Integrating Multiple Phenotype Resources Optimises Variant Evaluation in genetically determined Developmental Disorders 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Informing Variant Assessment using Structured Evidence from Prior Classifications (PS1, PM5, and PVS1 Sequence Variant Interpretation Criteria) 95%
- Accurate assignment of disease liability to genetic variants using only population data 94%
- The Importance of Automation in Genetic Diagnosis: Lessons from Analyzing an Inherited Retinal Degeneration Cohort with the Mendelian Analysis Toolkit (MATK) 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- AutoPVS1: An automatic classification tool for PVS1 interpretation of null variants 94%
- Structure-informed classification of RyR1 variants highlights limitations of current predictors and enables clinical interpretation 93%
- GeneBreaker: Variant simulation to improve the diagnosis of Mendelian rare genetic diseases 91%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.