4.6 Article

regSNPs-splicing: a tool for prioritizing synonymous single-nucleotide substitution

期刊

HUMAN GENETICS
卷 136, 期 9, 页码 1279-1289

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00439-017-1783-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. US National Institutes of Health [R01CA21346, R01GM11847]
  2. High-Tech Research and Development Program (863) of China [2015AA020101]
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1059775, 1083450]
  4. Qiagen Inc through a License Agreement with Cardiff University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While synonymous single-nucleotide variants (sSNVs) have largely been unstudied, since they do not alter protein sequence, mounting evidence suggests that they may affect RNA conformation, splicing, and the stability of nascent-mRNAs to promote various diseases. Accurately prioritizing deleterious sSNVs from a pool of neutral ones can significantly improve our ability of selecting functional genetic variants identified from various genome-sequencing projects, and, therefore, advance our understanding of disease etiology. In this study, we develop a computational algorithm to prioritize sSNVs based on their impact on mRNA splicing and protein function. In addition to genomic features that potentially affect splicing regulation, our proposed algorithm also includes dozens structural features that characterize the functions of alternatively spliced exons on protein function. Our systematical evaluation on thousands of sSNVs suggests that several structural features, including intrinsic disorder protein scores, solvent accessible surface areas, protein secondary structures, and known and predicted protein family domains, show significant differences between disease-causing and neutral sSNVs. Our result suggests that the protein structure features offer an added dimension of information while distinguishing disease-causing and neutral synonymous variants. The inclusion of structural features increases the predictive accuracy for functional sSNV prioritization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据