Variant effect predictor correlation with functional assays is reflective of clinical classification performance
Abstract Background Understanding the relationship between protein sequence and function is crucial for accurate classification of missense variants. Variant effect predictors (VEPs) play a vital role in deciphering this complex relationship, yet evaluating their performance remains challenging for...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Genome Biology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-025-03575-w |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Background Understanding the relationship between protein sequence and function is crucial for accurate classification of missense variants. Variant effect predictors (VEPs) play a vital role in deciphering this complex relationship, yet evaluating their performance remains challenging for several reasons, including data circularity, where the same or related data is used for training and assessment. High-throughput experimental strategies like deep mutational scanning (DMS) offer a promising solution. Results In this study, we extend upon our previous benchmarking approach, assessing the performance of 97 VEPs using missense DMS measurements from 36 different human proteins. In addition, a new pairwise, VEP-centric approach mitigates the impact of missing predictions on overall performance comparison. We observe a strong correspondence between VEP performance in DMS-based benchmarks and clinical variant classification, especially for predictors that have not been directly trained on human clinical variants. Conclusions Our results suggest that comparing VEP performance against diverse functional assays represents a reliable strategy for assessing their relative performance in clinical variant classification. However, major challenges in clinical interpretation of VEP scores persist, highlighting the need for further research to fully leverage computational predictors for genetic diagnosis. We also address practical considerations for end users in terms of choice of methodology. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1474-760X |