PreprintCited by 18Genomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Discordance between a deep learning model and clinical-grade variant pathogenicity classification in a rare disease cohort

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41525-025-00480-w · Paper page

Abstract

Genetic testing has become an essential component in the diagnosis and management of a wide range of clinical conditions, from cancer to developmental disorders, especially in rare Mendelian diseases. Efforts to identify rare phenotype-associated variants have predominantly focused on protein-truncating variants, while the interpretation of missense variants presents a considerable challenge. Deep learning algorithms excel in various applications across biomedical tasks 1,2 , yet accurately distinguishing between pathogenic and benign genetic variants remains an elusive goal 3-5 . Specifically, even the most sophisticated models encounter difficulties in accurately assessing the pathogenicity of missense variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Our investigation of AlphaMissense (AM) 5 , the latest iteration of deep learning methods for predicting the potential functional impact of missense variants and assessing gene essentiality, reveals important limitations in its ability to identify pathogenic missense variants within a rare disease cohort. Indeed, AM struggles to accurately assess the pathogenicity of variants in intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs), leading to unreliable gene-level essentiality scores for certain genes containing IDRs. This limitation highlights the challenges in applying AM faces in the context of clinical genetics 6 .

Overview

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 · 10.1101/2024.05.22.24307756

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. 10.1038/s41591-022-01981-2 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1056/NEJMra2302038 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1038/s41586-021-04043-8 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 2023, Genome-wide prediction of disease variant effects with a deep protein language model, Nat Genet, 55, 1512, 10.1038/s41588-023-01465-0 · DOI
  5. 2023, Accurate proteome-wide missense variant effect prediction with AlphaMissense, Science, 381, eadg7492, 10.1126/science.adg7492 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.10.013 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1056/NEJMoa2035790 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 2023, Structural and non-coding variants increase the diagnostic yield of clinical whole genome sequencing for rare diseases, Genome Med, 15, 94, 10.1186/s13073-023-01240-0 · DOI
  9. 10.1093/nar/gkz972 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 2023, Current approaches to genomic deep learning struggle to fully capture human genetic variation, Nat Genet, 55, 2021, 10.1038/s41588-023-01517-5 · DOI
  11. 2020, The Genomics Research and Innovation Network: creating an interoperable, federated, genomics learning system, Genet Med, 22, 371, 10.1038/s41436-019-0646-3 · DOI
  12. 2020, Children’s rare disease cohorts: an integrative research and clinical genomics initiative, NPJ Genom Med, 5, 29, 10.1038/s41525-020-0137-0 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.08.016 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 2022, Specifications of the ACMG/AMP variant curation guidelines for myocilin: Recommendations from the clingen glaucoma expert panel, Hum Mutat, 43, 2170, 10.1002/humu.24482 · DOI
  15. 2021, Variant curation expert panel recommendations for RYR1 pathogenicity classifications in malignant hyperthermia susceptibility, Genet Med, 23, 1288, 10.1038/s41436-021-01125-w · DOI
  16. 2021, Specifications of the variant curation guidelines for ITGA2B/ITGB3: ClinGen Platelet Disorder Variant Curation Panel, Blood Adv, 5, 414, 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003712 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/humu.24380 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/s00439-020-02199-3 · DOI
  19. 2023, ClinVar and HGMD genomic variant classification accuracy has improved over time, as measured by implied disease burden, Genome Med, 15, 51, 10.1186/s13073-023-01199-y · DOI
  20. 10.1097/MPG.0000000000003017 · DOI
  21. 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.11.014 · DOI
  22. 2021, Novel variants in the stem cell niche factor WNT2B define the disease phenotype as a congenital enteropathy with ocular dysgenesis, Eur J Hum Genet, 29, 998, 10.1038/s41431-021-00812-1 · DOI
  23. 10.1038/gim.2015.30 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 2024, The molecular basis for cellular function of intrinsically disordered protein regions, Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 25, 187, 10.1038/s41580-023-00673-0 · DOI
  25. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009911 · DOI
  26. 2021, External Validation of a Widely Implemented Proprietary Sepsis Prediction Model in Hospitalized Patients, JAMA Intern Med, 181, 1065, 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.2626 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Goldberg, C.B. et al. To do no harm - and the most good - with AI in health care. Nat Med (2024). · DOI
  28. 10.1038/s41586-020-2308-7 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Kong, S. W., Lee, I.-H., Collen, L. V., Manrai, A. K., Snapper, S. B., & Mandl, K. D.
Affiliations
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Kong, Sek Won
Venue
npj Genomic Medicine
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2024-05-23
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
17-17
ISSN
2056-7944 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408046295
Cited by
18
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 5
FWCI
10.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • npj Genomic Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (R01NS129188, U54HG012513, U01TR002623)
  • National Institutes of Health (U01TR002623)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG012513)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (RC2DK122532, P30DK034854)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS129188)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
AlphaMissense, intrinsically disordered regions, gene essentiality, variant interpretation, very early onset inflammatory bowel disease, truncating mutations, deep learning limitations

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