A comparative medical genomics approach may facilitate the interpretation of rare missense variation.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY Journal of Medical Genetics Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1136/jmg-2023-109760
Bushra Haque, George Guirguis, Meredith Curtis, Hera Mohsin, Susan Walker, Michelle M Morrow, Gregory Costain
{"title":"A comparative medical genomics approach may facilitate the interpretation of rare missense variation.","authors":"Bushra Haque, George Guirguis, Meredith Curtis, Hera Mohsin, Susan Walker, Michelle M Morrow, Gregory Costain","doi":"10.1136/jmg-2023-109760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the degree to which likely causal missense variants of single-locus traits in domesticated species have features suggestive of pathogenicity in a human genomic context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We extracted missense variants from the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Animals database for nine animals (cat, cattle, chicken, dog, goat, horse, pig, rabbit and sheep), mapped coordinates to the human reference genome and annotated variants using genome analysis tools. We also searched a private commercial laboratory database of genetic testing results from >400 000 individuals with suspected rare disorders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 339 variants that were mappable to the same residue and gene in the human genome, 56 had been previously classified with respect to pathogenicity: 31 (55.4%) pathogenic/likely pathogenic, 1 (1.8%) benign/likely benign and 24 (42.9%) uncertain/other. The odds ratio for a pathogenic/likely pathogenic classification in ClinVar was 7.0 (95% CI 4.1 to 12.0, p<0.0001), compared with all other germline missense variants in these same 220 genes. The remaining 283 variants disproportionately had allele frequencies and REVEL scores that supported pathogenicity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cross-species comparisons could facilitate the interpretation of rare missense variation. These results provide further support for comparative medical genomics approaches that connect big data initiatives in human and veterinary genetics.</p>","PeriodicalId":16237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"817-821"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287553/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg-2023-109760","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the degree to which likely causal missense variants of single-locus traits in domesticated species have features suggestive of pathogenicity in a human genomic context.

Methods: We extracted missense variants from the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Animals database for nine animals (cat, cattle, chicken, dog, goat, horse, pig, rabbit and sheep), mapped coordinates to the human reference genome and annotated variants using genome analysis tools. We also searched a private commercial laboratory database of genetic testing results from >400 000 individuals with suspected rare disorders.

Results: Of 339 variants that were mappable to the same residue and gene in the human genome, 56 had been previously classified with respect to pathogenicity: 31 (55.4%) pathogenic/likely pathogenic, 1 (1.8%) benign/likely benign and 24 (42.9%) uncertain/other. The odds ratio for a pathogenic/likely pathogenic classification in ClinVar was 7.0 (95% CI 4.1 to 12.0, p<0.0001), compared with all other germline missense variants in these same 220 genes. The remaining 283 variants disproportionately had allele frequencies and REVEL scores that supported pathogenicity.

Conclusion: Cross-species comparisons could facilitate the interpretation of rare missense variation. These results provide further support for comparative medical genomics approaches that connect big data initiatives in human and veterinary genetics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较医学基因组学方法可能有助于解释罕见的错义变异。
目的:确定在人类基因组背景下,驯化物种单焦点性状的可能致病错义变异在多大程度上具有提示致病性的特征:我们从在线动物孟德尔遗传数据库中提取了九种动物(猫、牛、鸡、狗、山羊、马、猪、兔和绵羊)的错义变体,将坐标映射到人类参考基因组,并使用基因组分析工具对变体进行注释。我们还搜索了一个私人商业实验室数据库,该数据库收录了超过 40 万名疑似罕见疾病患者的基因检测结果:在人类基因组中可映射到相同残基和基因的 339 个变异中,有 56 个变异先前已就致病性进行过分类:31 个(55.4%)致病/可能致病,1 个(1.8%)良性/可能良性,24 个(42.9%)不确定/其他。在 ClinVar 中,致病/可能致病分类的几率比为 7.0(95% CI 4.1 至 12.0,p 结论:跨物种比较有助于解释罕见的错义变异。这些结果为比较医学基因组学方法提供了进一步支持,这种方法将人类和兽医遗传学中的大数据计划联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Genetics
Journal of Medical Genetics 医学-遗传学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
92
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Genetics is a leading international peer-reviewed journal covering original research in human genetics, including reviews of and opinion on the latest developments. Articles cover the molecular basis of human disease including germline cancer genetics, clinical manifestations of genetic disorders, applications of molecular genetics to medical practice and the systematic evaluation of such applications worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Rare disease genomic testing in the UK and Ireland: promoting timely and equitable access. Classification of PTEN germline non-truncating variants: a new approach to interpretation. Canadian College of Medical Geneticists: clinical practice advisory document - responsibility to recontact for reinterpretation of clinical genetic testing. UBTF haploinsufficiency associated with UBTF-related global developmental delay and distinctive facial features without neuroregression. K acetyltransferase 2B (KAT2B) variants can be responsible for early onset steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1