Classification of rare missense substitutions, using risk surfaces, with genetic‐ and molecular‐epidemiology applications

Many individually rare missense substitutions are encountered during deep resequencing of candidate susceptibility genes and clinical mutation screening of known susceptibility genes. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are among the most resequenced of all genes, and clinical mutation screening of these genes provides an extensive data set for analysis of rare missense substitutions. Align‐GVGD is a mathematically simple missense substitution analysis algorithm, based on the Grantham difference, which has already contributed to classification of missense substitutions in BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2. However, the distribution of genetic risk as a function of Align‐GVGD's output variables Grantham variation (GV) and Grantham deviation (GD) has not been well characterized. Here, we used data from the Myriad Genetic Laboratories database of nearly 70,000 full‐sequence tests plus two risk estimates, one approximating the odds ratio and the other reflecting strength of selection, to display the distribution of risk in the GV‐GD plane as a series of surfaces. We abstracted contours from the surfaces and used the contours to define a sequence of missense substitution grades ordered from greatest risk to least risk. The grades were validated internally using a third, personal and family history‐based, measure of risk. The Align‐GVGD grades defined here are applicable to both the genetic epidemiology problem of classifying rare missense substitutions observed in known susceptibility genes and the molecular epidemiology problem of analyzing rare missense substitutions observed during case‐control mutation screening studies of candidate susceptibility genes. Hum Mutat 29(11), 1342–1354, 2008. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  Douglas F Easton,et al.  Genetic evidence and integration of various data sources for classifying uncertain variants into a single model , 2008, Human mutation.

[2]  Andrej Sali,et al.  Functional Impact of Missense Variants in BRCA1 Predicted by Supervised Learning , 2006, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[3]  A. Zharkikh,et al.  Analysis of missense variation in human BRCA1 in the context of interspecific sequence variation , 2004, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[4]  Z. Yang,et al.  Likelihood ratio tests for detecting positive selection and application to primate lysozyme evolution. , 1998, Molecular biology and evolution.

[5]  Fergus J Couch,et al.  A systematic genetic assessment of 1,433 sequence variants of unknown clinical significance in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer-predisposition genes. , 2007, American journal of human genetics.

[6]  S. Seal,et al.  PALB2, which encodes a BRCA2-interacting protein, is a breast cancer susceptibility gene , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[7]  Warren C. Lathe,et al.  Prediction of deleterious human alleles. , 2001, Human molecular genetics.

[8]  Andrew J. Grimm,et al.  Interpreting missense variants: comparing computational methods in human disease genes CDKN2A, MLH1, MSH2, MECP2, and tyrosinase (TYR) , 2007, Human mutation.

[9]  M. Orozco,et al.  Sequence‐based prediction of pathological mutations , 2004, Proteins.

[10]  J. Hopper,et al.  Genetic, functional, and histopathological evaluation of two C-terminal BRCA1 missense variants , 2005, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[11]  W. Fitch,et al.  An improved method for determining codon variability in a gene and its application to the rate of fixation of mutations in evolution , 1970, Biochemical Genetics.

[12]  A. Sidow,et al.  Physicochemical constraint violation by missense substitutions mediates impairment of protein function and disease severity. , 2005, Genome research.

[13]  Nazneen Rahman,et al.  Truncating mutations in the Fanconi anemia J gene BRIP1 are low-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[14]  E. Capriotti,et al.  Use of estimated evolutionary strength at the codon level improves the prediction of disease‐related protein mutations in humans , 2008, Human mutation.

[15]  Jotun Hein,et al.  A nucleotide substitution model with nearest-neighbour interactions , 2004, ISMB/ECCB.

[16]  Sue Healey,et al.  Clinical classification of BRCA1 and BRCA2 DNA sequence variants: the value of cytokeratin profiles and evolutionary analysis--a report from the kConFab Investigators. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  Nazneen Rahman,et al.  ATM mutations that cause ataxia-telangiectasia are breast cancer susceptibility alleles , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[18]  R. Grantham.  Amino Acid Difference Formula to Help Explain Protein Evolution , 1974, Science.

[19]  Steven Henikoff,et al.  SIFT: predicting amino acid changes that affect protein function , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  S. Tavtigian,et al.  In silico analysis of missense substitutions using sequence‐alignment based methods , 2008, Human mutation.

[21]  J. Moult,et al.  Loss of protein structure stability as a major causative factor in monogenic disease. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[22]  Iain M. Wallace,et al.  M-Coffee: combining multiple sequence alignment methods with T-Coffee , 2006, Nucleic acids research.

[23]  Maria Teresa Landi,et al.  MC1R, ASIP, and DNA repair in sporadic and familial melanoma in a Mediterranean population. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[24]  F. Couch,et al.  Integrated evaluation of DNA sequence variants of unknown clinical significance: application to BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 2004, American journal of human genetics.

[25]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Predicting deleterious amino acid substitutions. , 2001, Genome research.

[26]  Shamil R Sunyaev,et al.  Most rare missense alleles are deleterious in humans: implications for complex disease and association studies. , 2007, American journal of human genetics.

[27]  Jonathan C. Cohen,et al.  Multiple Rare Alleles Contribute to Low Plasma Levels of HDL Cholesterol , 2004, Science.

[28]  J. Hopper,et al.  Genetic and histopathologic evaluation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 DNA sequence variants of unknown clinical significance. , 2006, Cancer research.

[29]  J. Bond,et al.  Detailed computational study of p53 and p16: using evolutionary sequence analysis and disease-associated mutations to predict the functional consequences of allelic variants , 2003, Oncogene.

[30]  A. Zharkikh,et al.  Comprehensive statistical study of 452 BRCA1 missense substitutions with classification of eight recurrent substitutions as neutral , 2005, Journal of Medical Genetics.