Dong Chengliang, Wei Peng, Jian Xueqiu, Gibbs Richard, Boerwinkle Eric, Wang Kai, Liu Xiaoming
Zilkha Neurogenetic Institute, Biostatistics Division, Department of Preventive Medicine and.
Human Genetics Center, Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA and.
Hum Mol Genet. 2015 Apr 15;24(8):2125-37. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddu733. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
Accurate deleteriousness prediction for nonsynonymous variants is crucial for distinguishing pathogenic mutations from background polymorphisms in whole exome sequencing (WES) studies. Although many deleteriousness prediction methods have been developed, their prediction results are sometimes inconsistent with each other and their relative merits are still unclear in practical applications. To address these issues, we comprehensively evaluated the predictive performance of 18 current deleteriousness-scoring methods, including 11 function prediction scores (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, MutationTaster, Mutation Assessor, FATHMM, LRT, PANTHER, PhD-SNP, SNAP, SNPs&GO and MutPred), 3 conservation scores (GERP++, SiPhy and PhyloP) and 4 ensemble scores (CADD, PON-P, KGGSeq and CONDEL). We found that FATHMM and KGGSeq had the highest discriminative power among independent scores and ensemble scores, respectively. Moreover, to ensure unbiased performance evaluation of these prediction scores, we manually collected three distinct testing datasets, on which no current prediction scores were tuned. In addition, we developed two new ensemble scores that integrate nine independent scores and allele frequency. Our scores achieved the highest discriminative power compared with all the deleteriousness prediction scores tested and showed low false-positive prediction rate for benign yet rare nonsynonymous variants, which demonstrated the value of combining information from multiple orthologous approaches. Finally, to facilitate variant prioritization in WES studies, we have pre-computed our ensemble scores for 87 347 044 possible variants in the whole-exome and made them publicly available through the ANNOVAR software and the dbNSFP database.
在全外显子组测序(WES)研究中,准确预测非同义变异的有害性对于区分致病突变和背景多态性至关重要。尽管已经开发了许多有害性预测方法,但它们的预测结果有时相互不一致,并且在实际应用中它们的相对优缺点仍不明确。为了解决这些问题,我们全面评估了18种当前有害性评分方法的预测性能,包括11种功能预测评分(PolyPhen-2、SIFT、MutationTaster、Mutation Assessor、FATHMM、LRT、PANTHER、PhD-SNP、SNAP、SNPs&GO和MutPred)、3种保守性评分(GERP++、SiPhy和PhyloP)以及4种综合评分(CADD、PON-P、KGGSeq和CONDEL)。我们发现,在独立评分和综合评分中,FATHMM和KGGSeq分别具有最高的判别力。此外,为确保对这些预测评分进行无偏的性能评估,我们手动收集了三个不同的测试数据集,目前没有任何预测评分在这些数据集上进行过调整。另外,我们开发了两种新的综合评分,它们整合了9种独立评分和等位基因频率。与所有测试的有害性预测评分相比,我们的评分具有最高的判别力,并且对于良性但罕见的非同义变异显示出较低的假阳性预测率,这证明了整合多种直系同源方法信息的价值。最后,为了便于在WES研究中对变异进行优先级排序,我们已经预先计算了全外显子组中87347044个可能变异的综合评分,并通过ANNOVAR软件和dbNSFP数据库将其公开。