"The molecule's the thing:" the promise of molecular modeling and dynamic simulations in aiding the prioritization and interpretation of genomic testing results.

Clinical genomics is now a reality and lies at the heart of individualized medicine efforts. The success of these approaches is evidenced by the increasing volume of publications that report causal links between genomic variants and disease. In spite of early success, clinical genomics currently faces significant challenges in establishing the relevance of the majority of variants identified by next generation sequencing tests. Indeed, the majority of mutations identified are harbored by proteins whose functions remain elusive. Herein we describe the current scenario in genomic testing and in particular the burden of variants of unknown significance (VUSs). We highlight a role for molecular modeling and molecular dynamic simulations as tools that can significantly increase the yield of information to aid in the evaluation of pathogenicity. Though the application of these methodologies to the interpretation of variants identified by genomic testing is not yet widespread, we predict that an increase in their use will significantly benefit the mission of clinical genomics for individualized medicine.

[1]  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.

[2]  D. Kovalskyy,et al.  A molecular dynamics study of the structural stability of HIV‐1 protease under physiological conditions: The role of Na+ ions in stabilizing the active site , 2004, Proteins.

[3]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  W. M. Westler,et al.  Protein conformational dynamics in the mechanism of HIV-1 protease catalysis , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  Pedro G Pascutti,et al.  Impact of M36I polymorphism on the interaction of HIV-1 protease with its substrates: insights from molecular dynamics , 2014, BMC Genomics.

[6]  R. Hilgenfeld,et al.  Utility of homology models in the drug discovery process , 2004, Drug Discovery Today.

[7]  John V Heymach,et al.  Effect of KRAS oncogene substitutions on protein behavior: implications for signaling and clinical outcome. , 2012, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[8]  Torsten Schwede,et al.  Modelling three-dimensional protein structures for applications in drug design. , 2014, Drug discovery today.

[9]  T. Schwede,et al.  Protein structure homology modeling using SWISS-MODEL workspace , 2008, Nature Protocols.

[10]  Michael J E Sternberg,et al.  The Phyre2 web portal for protein modeling, prediction and analysis , 2015, Nature Protocols.

[11]  F. Collins,et al.  A new initiative on precision medicine. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  A Sali,et al.  Modeling mutations and homologous proteins. , 1995, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[13]  D. Kovalskyy,et al.  Identification of novel small molecule inhibitors of adenovirus gene transfer using a high throughput screening approach. , 2013, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[14]  A. Sali,et al.  Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes. , 2000, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[15]  Yang Zhang Protein structure prediction: when is it useful? , 2009, Current opinion in structural biology.

[16]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. , 2014, JAMA.