13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Opportunities and challenges for the computational interpretation of rare variation in clinically important genes

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Genome sequencing is enabling precision medicine—tailoring treatment to the unique constellation of variants in an individual’s genome. The impact of recurrent pathogenic variants is often understood, however there is a long tail of rare genetic variants that are uncharacterized. The problem of uncharacterized rare variation is especially acute when it occurs in genes of known clinical importance with functionally consequential variants and associated mechanisms. Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in these genes are discovered at a rate that outpaces current ability to classify them with databases of previous cases, experimental evaluation, and computational predictors. Clinicians are thus left without guidance about the significance of variants that may have actionable consequences. Computational prediction of the impact of rare genetic variation is increasingly becoming an important capability. In this paper, we review the technical and ethical challenges of interpreting the function of rare variants in two settings: inborn errors of metabolism in newborns and pharmacogenomics. We propose a framework for a genomic learning healthcare system with an initial focus on early-onset treatable disease in newborns and actionable pharmacogenomics. We argue that (1) a genomic learning healthcare system must allow for continuous collection and assessment of rare variants, (2) emerging machine learning methods will enable algorithms to predict the clinical impact of rare variants on protein function, and (3) ethical considerations must inform the construction and deployment of all rare-variation triage strategies, particularly with respect to health disparities arising from unbalanced ancestry representation.

          Abstract

          Genome sequencing is enabling precision medicine—tailoring treatment to the unique constellation of variants in an individual’s genome. The impact of recurrent pathogenic variants is often understood, leaving a long tail of rare genetic variants that are uncharacterized. The problem of uncharacterized rare variation is especially acute when it occurs in genes of known clinical importance with functionally consequential variants and associated mechanisms. Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in these genes are discovered at a rate that outpaces current ability to classify them with databases of previous cases, experimental evaluation, and computational predictors. Clinicians are thus left without guidance about the significance of variants that may have actionable consequences. Computational prediction of the impact of rare genetic variation is increasingly becoming an important capability. In this paper, we review the technical and ethical challenges of interpreting the function of rare variants in two settings: inborn errors of metabolism in newborns and pharmacogenomics. We propose a framework for a genomic learning healthcare system with an initial focus on early-onset treatable disease in newborns and actionable pharmacogenomics. We argue that (1) a genomic learning healthcare system must allow for continuous collection and assessment of rare variants, (2) emerging machine learning methods will enable algorithms to predict the clinical impact of rare variants on protein function, and (3) ethical considerations must inform the construction and deployment of all rare-variation triage strategies, particularly with respect to health disparities arising from unbalanced ancestry representation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references103

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology

          The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) previously developed guidance for the interpretation of sequence variants. 1 In the past decade, sequencing technology has evolved rapidly with the advent of high-throughput next generation sequencing. By adopting and leveraging next generation sequencing, clinical laboratories are now performing an ever increasing catalogue of genetic testing spanning genotyping, single genes, gene panels, exomes, genomes, transcriptomes and epigenetic assays for genetic disorders. By virtue of increased complexity, this paradigm shift in genetic testing has been accompanied by new challenges in sequence interpretation. In this context, the ACMG convened a workgroup in 2013 comprised of representatives from the ACMG, the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) to revisit and revise the standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants. The group consisted of clinical laboratory directors and clinicians. This report represents expert opinion of the workgroup with input from ACMG, AMP and CAP stakeholders. These recommendations primarily apply to the breadth of genetic tests used in clinical laboratories including genotyping, single genes, panels, exomes and genomes. This report recommends the use of specific standard terminology: ‘pathogenic’, ‘likely pathogenic’, ‘uncertain significance’, ‘likely benign’, and ‘benign’ to describe variants identified in Mendelian disorders. Moreover, this recommendation describes a process for classification of variants into these five categories based on criteria using typical types of variant evidence (e.g. population data, computational data, functional data, segregation data, etc.). Because of the increased complexity of analysis and interpretation of clinical genetic testing described in this report, the ACMG strongly recommends that clinical molecular genetic testing should be performed in a CLIA-approved laboratory with results interpreted by a board-certified clinical molecular geneticist or molecular genetic pathologist or equivalent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The mutational constraint spectrum quantified from variation in 141,456 humans

            Genetic variants that inactivate protein-coding genes are a powerful source of information about the phenotypic consequences of gene disruption: genes that are crucial for the function of an organism will be depleted of such variants in natural populations, whereas non-essential genes will tolerate their accumulation. However, predicted loss-of-function variants are enriched for annotation errors, and tend to be found at extremely low frequencies, so their analysis requires careful variant annotation and very large sample sizes 1 . Here we describe the aggregation of 125,748 exomes and 15,708 genomes from human sequencing studies into the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD). We identify 443,769 high-confidence predicted loss-of-function variants in this cohort after filtering for artefacts caused by sequencing and annotation errors. Using an improved model of human mutation rates, we classify human protein-coding genes along a spectrum that represents tolerance to inactivation, validate this classification using data from model organisms and engineered human cells, and show that it can be used to improve the power of gene discovery for both common and rare diseases.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A Survey on Transfer Learning

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Am J Hum Genet
                Am J Hum Genet
                American Journal of Human Genetics
                Elsevier
                0002-9297
                1537-6605
                01 April 2021
                01 April 2021
                01 April 2021
                : 108
                : 4
                : 535-548
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Biomedical Informatics Training Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
                [2 ]Biophysics Graduate Group, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
                [3 ]Department of Bioengineering and Therapeutics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [4 ]Program in Bioethics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [5 ]Institute for Health & Aging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [6 ]Institute for Human Genetics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [7 ]Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
                [8 ]Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
                [9 ]Illumina, Inc., Foster City, CA 94404, USA
                [10 ]UCSF-UCB Joint Medical Program, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
                [11 ]Department of Social & Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [12 ]Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [13 ]Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
                [14 ]Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA
                [15 ]Departments of Bioengineering & Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author rbaltman@ 123456stanford.edu
                [16]

                These authors contributed equally

                Article
                S0002-9297(21)00087-2
                10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.03.003
                8059338
                33798442
                40f26184-4b8d-44e9-a7bc-c4062dcccb23
                © 2021 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Perspective

                Genetics
                Genetics

                Comments

                Comment on this article