Cited by 123Genomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies

Towards precision medicine: advances in computational approaches for the analysis of human variants

Open access
Peterson, Thomas A., Doughty, Emily, Kann, Maricel G.·2013·Journal of Molecular Biology

Abstract

Variations and similarities in our individual genomes are part of our history, our heritage, and our identity. Some human genomic variants are associated with common traits such as hair and eye color, while others are associated with susceptibility to disease or response to drug treatment. Identifying the human variations producing clinically relevant phenotypic changes is critical for providing accurate and personalized diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment for diseases. Furthermore, a better understanding of the molecular underpinning of disease can lead to development of new drug targets for precision medicine. Several resources have been designed for collecting and storing human genomic variations in highly structured, easily accessible databases. Unfortunately, a vast amount of information about these genetic variants and their functional and phenotypic associations is currently buried in the literature, only accessible by manual curation or sophisticated text text-mining technology to extract the relevant information. In addition, the low cost of sequencing technologies coupled with increasing computational power has enabled the development of numerous computational methodologies to predict the pathogenicity of human variants. This review provides a detailed comparison of current human variant resources, including HGMD, OMIM, ClinVar, and UniProt/Swiss-Prot, followed by an overview of the computational methods and techniques used to leverage the available data to predict novel deleterious variants. We expect these resources and tools to become the foundation for understanding the molecular details of genomic variants leading to disease, which in turn will enable the promise of precision medicine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jmb.2013.08.008

Cites

175 of 175 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In practice, many computational methods overlap and thus do not offer independent assessment of pathogenicity.

    “In practice, many methods overlap and thus do not offer independent assessment of pathogenicity.4,6”

    From Calibration of computational tools for missense variant pathogenicity classification and ClinGen recommendations for PP3/BP4 criteria (2022) · cites this paper as [4]

    Section 4 (page not available) says prediction methods often use common information and gives examples of methods sharing sequence-conservation metrics. It does not conclude that those methods offer no independent assessment of pathogenicity; it also notes differences in their models and additional attributes. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Precision medicine has grown greatly with support from machine learning and data mining tools.

    “There has been unprecedented growth in the development of precision medicine supported by ML (machine learning) approaches (Delavan et al., 2017;Peterson et al., 2013;Zou et al., 2017) and data mining tools (Chawla and Davis, 2013;Cheng et al., 2015;Margolies et al., 2016).”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Peterson et al., 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [20]About ClinVar [cited 2013 February 3rd]; Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/
  2. [54]NCBI’s 1000 Genomes Annotation Tracks Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/variation/tools/1000genomes/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/variation/
  3. [65]den Dunnen JT Antonarakis SE Mutation nomenclature extensions and suggestions to describe complex mutations: a discussion Hum Mutat 2000 15 1 7 12 10612815
  4. [81]Entrez Help [Internet] Bethesda (MD) National Center for Biotechnology Information (US) 2005-. Entrez Help 2006 1 20 [Updated 2011 Dec 19]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK3837/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peterson, T. A., Doughty, E., & Kann, M. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Kann, Maricel G.
Venue
Journal of Molecular Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-11
Volume
425
Issue
21
Pages
4047-4063
ISSN
0022-2836 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024364470
Cited by
123
References
175
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Molecular Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k22ca143148-03)
  • National Cancer Institute (1K22CA143148, K22 CA143148)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM009722, T15LM007033)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Keywords
human genetic variants, precision medicine, variant pathogenicity prediction, deleterious variant prediction, variant database, ClinVar, OMIM, HGMD, disease susceptibility, drug response, drug target identification, personalized diagnosis and treatment
MeSH terms
Humans, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Sequence Analysis, Computational Biology, Genetic Predisposition to Disease

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review