Decoding Missense Variants by Incorporating Phase Separation via Machine Learning
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Computational models have made significant progress in predicting the effect of protein variants. However, deciphering numerous variants of uncertain significance (VUS) located within intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) remains challenging. To address this issue, we introduce phase separation, which is tightly linked to IDRs, into the investigation of missense variants. Phase separation is vital for multiple physiological processes. By leveraging missense variants that alter phase separation propensity, we develop a machine learning approach named PSMutPred to predict the impact of missense mutations on phase separation. PSMutPred demonstrates robust performance in predicting missense variants that affect natural phase separation. In vitro experiments further underscore its validity. By applying PSMutPred on over 522,000 ClinVar missense variants, it significantly contributes to decoding the pathogenesis of disease variants, especially those in IDRs. Our work provides insights into the understanding of a vast number of VUSs in IDRs, expediting clinical interpretation and diagnosis. Phase separation is essential for various physiological processes. Feng et al. propose PSMutPred, a machine learning approach to predict impacts of missense mutations on phase separation and aid in understanding the pathogenesis of disease 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.
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
Rives, A., Meier, J., Sercu, T., Goyal, S., Lin, Z., Liu, J., Guo, D., Ott, M., Zitnick, C. L., Ma, J., et al. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2016239118 · Cited by 3,286 · see citing works
Rives, A., Meier, J., Sercu, T., Goyal, S., Lin, Z., Liu, J., Guo, D., Ott, M., Zitnick, C. L., Ma, J., et al. (2019) · doi:10.1101/622803 · Cited by 3,280 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…evolutionary conservation 2 , challenge the effectiveness of traditional features 7 , using two representative pathogenicity prediction models, including EVE 31 and ESM1b 46,88 , we aimtotestwhetherPS-relatedfeaturescanaddresstheIDRgapsleftby evolutionary features in pathogenicity prediction (Fig.”
Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome
Tunyasuvunakool, K., Adler, J., Wu, Z., Green, T., Zielinski, M., Žídek, A., Bridgland, A., Cowie, A., Meyer, C., Laydon, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1 · Cited by 3,025 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The structures of human and mouse EPS8 were predicted using AlphaFold2 3,104 .”
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
Geng, C., Vangone, A., Folkers, G. E., Xue, L. C., & Bonvin, A. M. J. J. (2019) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.25630 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Feng, M., Wei, X., Zheng, X., Liu, L., Lin, L., Xia, M., He, G., Shi, Y., & Lu, Q.
- Affiliations
- Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- He, Guang
- Shi, Yi
- Venue
- Nature Communications
- Published
- 2024-09-27
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 8279-8279
- ISSN
- 2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11436885
- OpenAlex
- W4402908277
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 3.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (82071262, 2017SHZDZX01)
- Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (2023ZKZD16)
- Shanghai Jiao Tong University (YG2024QNA59, YG2022QN111, YG2022ZD024, YG2023ZD26)
- National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFE0125300, 2020YFA0509700, 2017SHZDZX01)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
- Keywords
- phase separation, intrinsically disordered regions, missense mutations, variants of uncertain significance, ClinVar, pathogenesis, machine learning prediction models
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Phase Separation, Humans, Computational Biology, Mutation, Missense, Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
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