Cited by 1,224Genomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Guidelines for investigating causality of sequence variants in human disease

Open access
MacArthur, D. G., Manolio, T. A., Dimmock, D. P., Rehm, H. L., Shendure, J., Abecasis, G. R., Adams, D. R., Altman, R. B. +19 more·2014·Nature

Abstract

Acceleration in discovery of rare genetic variants possibly linked with disease may mean an increased risk of false-positive reports of causality; this Perspective proposes guidelines to distinguish disease-causing sequence variants from the many potentially functional variants in a human genome, and to assess confidence in their pathogenicity, and highlights priority areas for development. The wide-scale availability of high-throughput DNA sequencing technologies means that data on genetic variation in human diseases are accumulating rapidly. In this Perspective, Daniel MacArthur and colleagues sound a note of caution, pointing out that up to a quarter of reported disease-linked mutations have been found to either be common polymorphisms or have lacked sufficient evidence for pathogenicity. The authors discuss the key challenges associated with assessing sequence variants in human disease and propose guidelines for the robust differentiation between disease-causing genetic variants and other variants present in the human genome. They highlight several areas where research and resource development are urgently needed if genomic research findings are to be successfully translated into the clinical diagnostic setting. The discovery of rare genetic variants is accelerating, and clear guidelines for distinguishing disease-causing sequence variants from the many potentially functional variants present in any human genome are urgently needed. Without rigorous standards we risk an acceleration of false-positive reports of causality, which would impede the translation of genomic research findings into the clinical diagnostic setting and hinder biological understanding of disease. Here we discuss the key challenges of assessing sequence variants in human disease, integrating both gene-level and variant-level support for causality. We propose guidelines for summarizing confidence in variant pathogenicity and highlight several areas that require further resource development.

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 · 10.1038/nature13127

Cites

58 of 58 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?

  • Establishing the causal role of individual variants within genes associated with rare disorders remains problematic, and many patients with suspected rare genetic diseases lack a definitive diagnosis.

    “Although huge strides have been made in associating specific genes with particular disorders, establishing the causal role of individual variants within those genes remains problematic, and many patients with suspected rare genetic diseases are left without a definitive diagnosis28.”

    From A brief history of human disease genetics (2020) · cites this paper as [28]

  • For monogenic diseases, whose causal alleles are typically rare, penetrant and coding, genetic approaches have generally been both necessary and sufficient to implicate a gene as causal.

    “For monogenic diseases, for which the alleles responsible are typically rare, penetrant and coding, genetic approaches have generally been both necessary and sufficient to implicate a gene as causal28.”

    From A brief history of human disease genetics (2020) · cites this paper as [28]

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: 1

  1. [52]Editorial Share alike Nature 2012 490 143 144 23066546

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacArthur, D. G., Manolio, T. A., Dimmock, D. P., Rehm, H. L., Shendure, J., Abecasis, G. R., Adams, D. R., Altman, R. B., Antonarakis, S. E., Ashley, E. A., Barrett, J. C., Biesecker, L. G., Conrad, D. F., Cooper, G. M., Cox, N. J., Daly, M. J., Gerstein, M. B., Goldstein, D. B., Hirschhorn, J. N., Leal, S. M., Pennacchio, L. A., Stamatoyannopoulos, J. A., Sunyaev, S. R., Valle, D., Voight, B. F., Winckler, W., & Gunter, C.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
  • MacArthur, D. G.
  • Gunter, C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2014-04
Volume
508
Issue
7497
Pages
469-476
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2169567789
Cited by
1,224
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 101 · 2018: 153 · 2017: 160 · 2016: 172 · 2015: 155 · 2014: 68 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
111.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL117626)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH101810)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG006997, U01HG007301, R01HG007022)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK020595)
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 pathogenicity assessment, rare variants, clinical genetic diagnosis
MeSH terms
Disease, False Positive Reactions, Genes, Humans, Publishing, Research Design, Genetic Variation, Reproducibility of Results, Guidelines as Topic, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Information Dissemination, Translational Research, Biomedical

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