Cited by 923Genomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyCancer Genomics and Diagnostics

Inferring the molecular and phenotypic impact of amino acid variants with MutPred2

Open access
Pejaver, Vikas, Urresti, Jorge, Lugo-Martinez, Jose, Pagel, Kymberleigh A., Lin, Guan Ning, Nam, Hyun-Jun, Mort, Matthew, Cooper, David N. +4 more·2020·Nature Communications

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Identifying pathogenic variants and underlying functional alterations is challenging. To this end, we introduce MutPred2, a tool that improves the prioritization of pathogenic amino acid substitutions over existing methods, generates molecular mechanisms potentially causative of disease, and returns interpretable pathogenicity score distributions on individual genomes. Whilst its prioritization performance is state-of-the-art, a distinguishing feature of MutPred2 is the probabilistic modeling of variant impact on specific aspects of protein structure and function that can serve to guide experimental studies of phenotype-altering variants. We demonstrate the utility of MutPred2 in the identification of the structural and functional mutational signatures relevant to Mendelian disorders and the prioritization of de novo mutations associated with complex neurodevelopmental disorders. We then experimentally validate the functional impact of several variants identified in patients with such disorders. We argue that mechanism-driven studies of human inherited disease have the potential to significantly accelerate the discovery of clinically actionable variants.

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/s41467-020-19669-x

Cites

110 of 110 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?

  • The estimated prevalence of pathogenic variants in the gnomAD reference set was 4.41%.

    “This procedure yielded a prior probability of pathogenicity (prevalence in the data set) of 4.41%, higher than that estimated previously for an exome of a healthy individual19 using a similar procedure but lower than the prevalence of 10% assumed by Tavtigian et al.9 for clinical sequencing data.”

    From Calibration of computational tools for missense variant pathogenicity classification and ClinGen recommendations for PP3/BP4 criteria (2022) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results section on estimating pathogenic missense variants reports 5.8% for unlabeled training variants and up to 1.3% for variants in a presumably healthy genome, not a prevalence in gnomAD. The Results section on external-tool evaluation mentions gnomAD as a source of unlabeled variants but gives no 4.41% estimate for that set (pages unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pejaver, V., Urresti, J., Lugo-Martinez, J., Pagel, K. A., Lin, G. N., Nam, H.-J., Mort, M., Cooper, D. N., Sebat, J., Iakoucheva, L. M., Mooney, S. D., & Radivojac, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Iakoucheva, Lilia M.
  • Mooney, Sean D.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2020-11-20
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
5918-5918
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3104285666
Cited by
923
References
110
Citations by year
2026: 114 · 2025: 187 · 2024: 176 · 2023: 134 · 2022: 94 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 5
FWCI
56.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Washington Research Foundation (Fund for Innovation in Data-Intensive Discovery)
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (Moore/Sloan Data Science Environments Project)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Moore/Sloan Data Science Environments Project)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | U.S. National Library of Medicine (K99 LM012992, R01 LM009722)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH076431, R01 MH104766, R01 MH109885, R01 MH105524)
  • Simons Foundation (345469)
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 › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Keywords
amino acid substitutions, pathogenicity prediction, protein structure-function relationship, monogenic disorders, de novo mutations, neurodevelopmental disorders, genetic disorders
MeSH terms
Humans, Mutation, Phenotype, Proteins, Software, Models, Statistical, Genome, Human, Computational Biology, Amino Acid Substitution, 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