Prioritizing genes for systematic variant effect mapping

Abstract Motivation When rare missense variants are clinically interpreted as to their pathogenicity, most are classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Although functional assays can provide strong evidence for variant classification, such results are generally unavailable. Multiplexed assays of variant effect can generate experimental ‘variant effect maps’ that score nearly all possible missense variants in selected protein targets for their impact on protein function. However, these efforts have not always prioritized proteins for which variant effect maps would have the greatest impact on clinical variant interpretation. Results Here, we mined databases of clinically interpreted variants and applied three strategies, each building on the previous, to prioritize genes for systematic functional testing of missense variation. The strategies ranked genes (i) by the number of unique missense VUS that had been reported to ClinVar; (ii) by movability- and reappearance-weighted impact scores, to give extra weight to reappearing, movable VUS and (iii) by difficulty-adjusted impact scores, to account for the more resource-intensive nature of generating variant effect maps for longer genes. Our results could be used to guide systematic functional testing of missense variation toward greater impact on clinical variant interpretation. Availability and implementation Source code available at: https://github.com/rothlab/mave-gene-prioritization Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

[1]  S. Fields,et al.  Deep mutational scanning: a new style of protein science , 2014, Nature Methods.

[2]  Julie O. Culver,et al.  Next-Generation Testing for Cancer Risk: Perceptions, Experiences, and Needs Among Early Adopters in Community Healthcare Settings. , 2015, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[3]  Etienne Rouleau,et al.  A guide for functional analysis of BRCA1 variants of uncertain significance , 2012, Human mutation.

[4]  Maitreya J. Dunham,et al.  Variant Interpretation: Functional Assays to the Rescue. , 2017, American journal of human genetics.

[5]  Jay Shendure,et al.  A Multiplex Homology-Directed DNA Repair Assay Reveals the Impact of More Than 1,000 BRCA1 Missense Substitution Variants on Protein Function. , 2018, American journal of human genetics.

[6]  C. Gille,et al.  Novel mutations in sarcomeric protein genes in dilated cardiomyopathy. , 2002, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[7]  F. Couch,et al.  Functional Assays for Analysis of Variants of Uncertain Significance in BRCA2 , 2014, Human mutation.

[8]  Maximillian G. Marin,et al.  A Massively Parallel Fluorescence Assay to Characterize the Effects of Synonymous Mutations on TP53 Expression , 2017, Molecular Cancer Research.

[9]  Chunlei Liu,et al.  ClinVar: improving access to variant interpretations and supporting evidence , 2017, Nucleic Acids Res..

[10]  Eran Segal,et al.  A Systematic p53 Mutation Library Links Differential Functional Impact to Cancer Mutation Pattern and Evolutionary Conservation. , 2018, Molecular cell.

[11]  Taylor L. Mighell,et al.  A saturation mutagenesis approach to understanding PTEN lipid phosphatase activity and genotype-phenotypes relationships , 2018, bioRxiv.

[12]  Magali Olivier,et al.  TP53 mutations in human cancers: origins, consequences, and clinical use. , 2010, Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology.

[13]  Shicai Wang,et al.  COSMIC: the Catalogue Of Somatic Mutations In Cancer , 2018, Nucleic Acids Res..

[14]  H. Watkins,et al.  The genetics of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Teare redux , 2007, Heart.

[15]  Keith Nykamp,et al.  Sherloc: a comprehensive refinement of the ACMG–AMP variant classification criteria , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[16]  P. Nurse,et al.  Complementation used to clone a human homologue of the fission yeast cell cycle control gene cdc2 , 1987, Nature.

[17]  Bale,et al.  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 , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[18]  Andrew J. Hill,et al.  Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans , 2015, bioRxiv.

[19]  Lily Hoffman-Andrews The known unknown: the challenges of genetic variants of uncertain significance in clinical practice , 2017, Journal of law and the biosciences.

[20]  Vanessa E. Gray,et al.  Multiplex Assessment of Protein Variant Abundance by Massively Parallel Sequencing , 2018, Nature Genetics.

[21]  Joseph D. Janizek,et al.  Accurate classification of BRCA1 variants with saturation genome editing , 2018, Nature.

[22]  Ricardo Villamarín-Salomón,et al.  ClinVar: public archive of interpretations of clinically relevant variants , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[23]  Jonathan S Berg,et al.  Quantifying the potential of functional evidence to reclassify variants of uncertain significance in the categorical and Bayesian interpretation frameworks , 2018, Human mutation.

[24]  Frederick P Roth,et al.  MaveQuest: a web resource for planning experimental tests of human variant effects , 2020, Bioinform..

[25]  Richard J. Smith Use and misuse of the reduced major axis for line-fitting. , 2009, American journal of physical anthropology.

[26]  E. Lander,et al.  Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome , 2015, Science.

[27]  Astrid Gall,et al.  Ensembl 2020 , 2019, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  E. Maher,et al.  VHL, the story of a tumour suppressor gene , 2014, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[29]  A proactive genotype-to-patient-phenotype map for cystathionine beta-synthase , 2020, Genome Medicine.

[30]  Frederick P. Roth,et al.  Multiplexed assays of variant effects contribute to a growing genotype–phenotype atlas , 2018, Human Genetics.

[31]  Steven E. Brenner,et al.  Recommendations for application of the functional evidence PS3/BS3 criterion using the ACMG/AMP sequence variant interpretation framework , 2019, Genome Medicine.

[32]  Atina G. Coté,et al.  A framework for exhaustively mapping functional missense variants , 2017, Molecular systems biology.

[33]  J. Seidman,et al.  A molecular basis for familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: A β cardiac myosin heavy chain gene missense mutation , 1990, Cell.

[34]  Alan F. Rubin,et al.  MaveDB: an open-source platform to distribute and interpret data from multiplexed assays of variant effect , 2019, Genome Biology.

[35]  David L. Young,et al.  Massively Parallel Functional Analysis of BRCA1 RING Domain Variants , 2015, Genetics.

[36]  M. King,et al.  Response to DNA damage of CHEK2 missense mutations in familial breast cancer. , 2012, Human molecular genetics.

[37]  D. Goldstein,et al.  Genic Intolerance to Functional Variation and the Interpretation of Personal Genomes , 2013, PLoS genetics.

[38]  Michael J. Osborn,et al.  Rescuing yeast mutants with human genes. , 2007, Briefings in functional genomics & proteomics.

[39]  James Y. Zou Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans , 2015, Nature.

[40]  Aviad Tsherniak,et al.  Mutational processes shape the landscape of TP53 mutations in human cancer , 2018, Nature Genetics.

[41]  M. Pane,et al.  MYH7-related myopathies: clinical, histopathological and imaging findings in a cohort of Italian patients , 2016, Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases.

[42]  J. Seidman,et al.  Gene Mutations in Apical Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy , 2005, Circulation.