Cited by 139Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsGene expression and cancer classification

Benchmarking of deep neural networks for predicting personal gene expression from DNA sequence highlights shortcomings

Open access
Sasse, Alexander, Ng, Bernard, Spiro, Anna E., Tasaki, Shinya, Bennett, David A., Gaiteri, Christopher, De Jager, Philip L., Chikina, Maria +1 more·2023·Nature Genetics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Deep learning methods have recently become the state of the art in a variety of regulatory genomic tasks 1-6, including the prediction of gene expression from genomic DNA. As such, these methods promise to serve as important tools in interpreting the full spectrum of genetic variation observed in personal genomes. Previous evaluation strategies have assessed their predictions of gene expression across genomic regions; however, systematic benchmarking is lacking to assess their predictions across individuals, which would directly evaluate their utility as personal DNA interpreters. We used paired whole genome sequencing and gene expression from 839 individuals in the ROSMAP study 7 to evaluate the ability of current methods to predict gene expression variation across individuals at varied loci. Our approach identifies a limitation of current methods to correctly predict the direction of variant effects. We show that this limitation stems from insufficiently learned sequence motif grammar and suggest new model training strategies to improve performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41588-023-01524-6

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • AlphaGenome has not yet been benchmarked on personal genome prediction, a known weakness of models in this space.

    “We have not yet benchmarked the model on personal genome prediction, which is a known weakness of models in this space40,41.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sasse, A., Ng, B., Spiro, A. E., Tasaki, S., Bennett, D. A., Gaiteri, C., De Jager, P. L., Chikina, M., & Mostafavi, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Chikina, Maria
  • Mostafavi, Sara
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2023-11-30
Volume
55
Issue
12
Pages
2060-2064
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W4389174422
Cited by
139
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 10
FWCI
23.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Funders
  • Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
  • National Institutes of Health (R01AG03-6836)
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (U01AG46152, P30AG10161, U01AG61356, R01 AG17917, P30 AG72975, R01AG15819)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG017917, U01AG058589, U01AG046152, R01AG057911, R01AG015819, P30AG010161, U01AG061356, U01AG072572, P30AG072975)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
gene expression prediction, deep neural network, benchmarking, personal genomics, sequence motifs, regulatory genomics, whole genome sequencing, personalized medicine

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