Back

Predicting functionally important breast cancer SNPs using pleiotropy, conservation, and protein structure

Cheng, A. C.; Carpenter, M. A.

2024-01-02 bioinformatics
10.1101/2024.01.01.573831 bioRxiv
Show abstract

MotivationWith over 24,000 SNPs associated with breast cancer in ClinVar, there is a need to prioritize the subset most likely to be causally linked to diagnostic, prognostic, and other clinical outcomes of disease. Building off currently known breast cancer oncogenes and SNPs, we identify the subset of SNPs with pleiotropic effects, with the goal of identifying mutations functionally relevant to disease progression. We further use sequence and structure analysis to prioritize missense mutations most likely to impact protein function. ResultsFrom the known breast cancer SNPs, we identified co-associated mutations located at evolutionarily conserved positions and contributing significant protein stability as potential focal points for disease biomarkers, protein function studies, and therapeutic intervention. To identify regions likely integral to protein function, we plotted genomic intervals where multiple disease density peaks overlap. Of the breast cancer SNPs, 1,714 were co-associated in-frame mutations, of which 930 occurred at conserved residue positions (Shannon Entropy <1.0) and 833 were also missense mutations. Building structure-based models of the 277 SNPs with available protein structure resulted in identification of 133 SNPs that are calculated to affect protein thermostability by >100-fold (>3 kcal/mol). The workflow we built can be applied to other diseases to help identify functional mutations. AvailabilityPython code for the integrated analysis workflow available at http://github.com/mcarpenter-brandeis/brc-pleiotropy and detailed data tables available in Supplemental Information. Contactacheng@brandeis.edu, meredith.a.carpenter@gmail.coms

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.