Cited by 1,049

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identification of deleterious mutations within three human genomes

Chun, Sung, Fay, Justin C.·2009·Genome Research

Abstract

Each human carries a large number of deleterious mutations. Together, these mutations make a significant contribution to human disease. Identification of deleterious mutations within individual genome sequences could substantially impact an individual's health through personalized prevention and treatment of disease. Yet, distinguishing deleterious mutations from the massive number of nonfunctional variants that occur within a single genome is a considerable challenge. Using a comparative genomics data set of 32 vertebrate species we show that a likelihood ratio test (LRT) can accurately identify a subset of deleterious mutations that disrupt highly conserved amino acids within protein-coding sequences, which are likely to be unconditionally deleterious. The LRT is also able to identify known human disease alleles and performs as well as two commonly used heuristic methods, SIFT and PolyPhen. Application of the LRT to three human genomes reveals 796–837 deleterious mutations per individual, ∼40% of which are estimated to be at <5% allele frequency. However, the overlap between predictions made by the LRT, SIFT, and PolyPhen, is low; 76% of predictions are unique to one of the three methods, and only 5% of predictions are shared across all three methods. Our results indicate that only a small subset of deleterious mutations can be reliably identified, but that this subset provides the raw material for personalized medicine.

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/gr.092619.109

Cites

9 of 9 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

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?

  • Functional prediction algorithms (8 of 10), including SIFT and PolyPhen, considered p.Gln55Arg benign and tolerated, with only Mutation taster and LRT scoring this change as deleterious.

    “Functional prediction algorithms (8 of 10), including SIFT33 and PolyPhen34, considered this change to be benign and tolerated, with only Mutation taster35 and LRT36 scoring this change as deleterious.”

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: 41

  1. 10.1086/513471 · DOI
  2. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030254 · DOI
  3. 10.1101/gr.070227.107 · DOI
  4. 10.1093/nar/gkm238 · DOI
  5. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl649 · DOI
  6. 10.1006/jmbi.2001.4510 · DOI
  7. 10.1101/gr.3577405 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1073/pnas.76.1.396 · DOI
  9. Dagan, 2002, Ratios of radical to conservative amino acid replacement are affected by mutational and compositional factors and may not be indicative of positive Darwinian selection, Mol Biol Evol, 19, 1022, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004161 · DOI
  10. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000183 · DOI
  11. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030010 · DOI
  12. 10.1093/nar/gkh340 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Fay, 2001, Positive and negative selection on the human genome, Genetics, 158, 1227, 10.1093/genetics/158.3.1227 · DOI
  14. 10.1038/4151024a · DOI
  15. 10.1101/gr.3895005 · DOI
  16. 10.1126/science.185.4154.862 · DOI
  17. 10.1126/science.1150021 · DOI
  18. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000027 · DOI
  19. 10.1534/genetics.107.080663 · DOI
  20. 10.1073/pnas.232565499 · DOI
  21. 10.1086/513473 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Lynch, 2000, The probability of duplicate gene preservation by subfunctionalization, Genetics, 154, 459, 10.1093/genetics/154.1.459 · DOI
  23. Lynch, 1993, The mutational meltdown in asexual populations, J Hered, 84, 339, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a111354 · DOI
  24. 10.1073/pnas.42.11.855 · DOI
  25. Muller, 1950, Our load of mutations, Am J Hum Genet, 2, 111
  26. Muse, 1994, A likelihood approach for comparing synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitution rates, with application to the chloroplast genome, Mol Biol Evol, 11, 715
  27. 10.1101/gr.176601 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1101/gr.212802 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/nar/gkg509 · DOI
  30. 10.1146/annurev.genom.7.080505.115630 · DOI
  31. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000160 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti079 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1086/321272 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1093/nar/gkf493 · DOI
  35. 10.1038/nature02390 · DOI
  36. 10.1146/annurev.ge.11.120177.000405 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.1101/gr.3804205 · DOI
  38. 10.1146/annurev.genom.6.080604.162146 · DOI
  39. 10.1093/hmg/10.6.591 · DOI
  40. 10.1101/gr.073585.107 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1002/humu.22 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Chun, S., & Fay, J. C.
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2009-07-14
Volume
19
Issue
9
Pages
1553-1561
ISSN
1088-9051
Cited by
1,049
References
9
Language
en

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