Insights for variant clinical interpretation based on a benchmark of 65 variant effect predictors
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract Amino acid substitutions in protein sequences are generally harmless, but a certain number of these changes can lead to disease. Accurate prediction of the impact of genetic variants is crucial for clinicians as it accelerates the diagnosis of patients with missense variants associated with health issues. Numerous computational tools have been developed for prediction of the pathogenicity of genetic variants based on different methodologies. Nowadays, many approaches are based on Machine Learning. Assessment of the performance of these diverse computational tools is crucial to provide guidance to both future users and especially clinicians. In this study, a large-scale study of 65 tools was conducted. Variants from both clinical and functional context have been used, incorporating data from the ClinVar database and bibliographic sources. The analysis showed that AlphaMissense is often performing very well and is actually the best option among existing tools. Additionally, meta-predictors, as expected, are of high quality and perform well on average. Tools using evolution information demonstrated highest performances on functional variants. These results also highlighted some variations in the difficulty to predict some specific variants while others are always well categorized. Strikingly, the majority of variants from the ClinVar database appear to be easy to predict, while variants from other sources of data are more challenging. These results demonstrate that this variant predictability can be classified into three distinct classes: easy, moderate and hard to predict. We analyzed the parameters leading to these differences and show that classes are linked to structural and functional information.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Richards, S., Aziz, N., Bale, S., Bick, D., Das, S., Gastier-Foster, J., Grody, W. W., Hegde, M., Lyon, E., Spector, E., et al. (2015) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2015.30 · Cited by 32,594 · see citing works
UniProt: the Universal Protein Knowledgebase in 2023
The UniProt Consortium, Bateman, A., Martin, M.-J., Orchard, S., Magrane, M., Ahmad, S., Alpi, E., Bowler-Barnett, E. H., Britto, R., Bye-A-Jee, H., et al. (2023) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkac1052 · Cited by 7,210 · see citing works
Evolutionarily conserved elements in vertebrate, insect, worm, and yeast genomes
Siepel, A., Bejerano, G., Pedersen, J. S., Hinrichs, A. S., Hou, M., Rosenbloom, K., Clawson, H., Spieth, J., Hillier, L. W., Richards, S., et al. (2005) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.3715005 · Cited by 4,408 · see citing works
Identifying a High Fraction of the Human Genome to be under Selective Constraint Using GERP++
Davydov, E. V., Goode, D. L., Sirota, M., Cooper, G. M., Sidow, A., & Batzoglou, S. (2010) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001025 · Cited by 1,757 · see citing works
Disease variant prediction with deep generative models of evolutionary data
Frazer, J., Notin, P., Dias, M., Gomez, A., Min, J. K., Brock, K., Gal, Y., & Marks, D. S. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04043-8 · Cited by 791 · see citing works
Widespread Genomic Signatures of Natural Selection in Hominid Evolution
McVicker, G., Gordon, D., Davis, C., & Green, P. (2009) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000471 · Cited by 456 · see citing works
Regional missense constraint improves variant deleteriousness prediction
Samocha, K. E., Kosmicki, J. A., Karczewski, K. J., O’Donnell-Luria, A. H., Pierce-Hoffman, E., MacArthur, D. G., Neale, B. M., & Daly, M. J. (2017) · doi:10.1101/148353 · Cited by 351 · see citing works
Predicting functional effect of missense variants using graph attention neural networks
Zhang, H., Xu, M. S., Fan, X., Chung, W. K., & Shen, Y. (2022) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00561-w · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Radjasandirane, R., Diharce, J., Gelly, J.-C., & de Brevern, A. G.
- Affiliations
- Inserm (FR)
- Venue
- Genomics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-05
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 111036
- ISSN
- 0888-7543 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4408765449
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 8.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Genomics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- French National Research Agency (ANR-11-LABX-0051, ANR-18-IDEX-0001, ANR-19-CE17-0021, ANR-11-IDEX-0005-02)
- Indo-French Centre for the Promotion of Advanced Research (5302-2)
- 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 › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- variant effect prediction, missense mutations, pathogenicity prediction, AlphaMissense, ClinVar, benchmarking, evolutionary conservation, meta-predictor, protein structure, variant interpretation
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Software, Genetic Variation, Computational Biology, Amino Acid Substitution, Mutation, Missense, Databases, Genetic
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