CADD Score Has Limited Clinical Validity for the Identification of Pathogenic Variants in Noncoding Regions in a Hereditary Cancer Panel

Overview

Journal Genet Med

Publisher Elsevier

Specialty Genetics

Date 2016 May 6

PMID 27148939

Citations 30

Authors

Cheryl A Mather

Sean D Mooney

Stephen J Salipante

Sheena Scroggins

David Wu

Colin C Pritchard

Brian H Shirts

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Several in silico tools have been shown to have reasonable research sensitivity and specificity for classifying sequence variants in coding regions. The recently developed combined annotation-dependent depletion (CADD) method generates predictive scores for single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) in all areas of the genome, including noncoding regions. We sought for non-coding variants to determine the clinical validity of common CADD scores.

Methods: We evaluated 12,391 unique SNVs in 624 patient samples submitted for germ-line mutation testing in a cancer-related gene panel. Stratifying by genomic region, we compared the distributions of CADD scores of rare SNVs, SNVs common in our patient population, and the null distribution of all possible SNVs.

Results: The median CADD scores of intronic and nonsynonymous variants were significantly different between rare and common SNVs (P < 0.0001). Despite these different distributions, no individual variants could be identified as plausibly causative among the rare intronic variants with the highest scores. The receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) for noncoding variants is modest, and the positive predictive value of CADD for intronic variants in panel testing was found to be 0.088.

Conclusion: Focused in silico scoring systems with much higher predictive value will be necessary for clinical genomic applications.Genet Med 18 12, 1269-1275.

Citing Articles

CADD v1.7: using protein language models, regulatory CNNs and other nucleotide-level scores to improve genome-wide variant predictions.

Schubach M, Maass T, Nazaretyan L, Roner S, Kircher M Nucleic Acids Res. 2024; 52(D1):D1143-D1154.

PMID: 38183205 PMC: 10767851. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkad989.

Assessing efficiency of fine-mapping obesity-associated variants through leveraging ancestry architecture and functional annotation using PAGE and UKBB cohorts.

Anwar M, Graff M, Highland H, Smit R, Wang Z, Buchanan V Hum Genet. 2023; 142(10):1477-1489.

PMID: 37658231 PMC: 11512743. DOI: 10.1007/s00439-023-02593-7.

Genetic variant annotation scores in congenital long QT syndrome.

Younis A, Bodurian C, Arking D, Bragazzi N, Tabaja C, Zareba W Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2023; 28(5):e13080.

PMID: 37571804 PMC: 10475886. DOI: 10.1111/anec.13080.

Identifying the Common Cell-Free DNA Biomarkers across Seven Major Cancer Types.

Luo M, Liu Y, Zhao M Biology (Basel). 2023; 12(7).

PMID: 37508365 PMC: 10376459. DOI: 10.3390/biology12070934.

A novel compound heterozygous mutation of in Chinese patients with isolated cervical dystonia.

Wu R, Dou W, Zhou H, Shi M Front Neurol. 2023; 14:1105760.

PMID: 37082441 PMC: 10110855. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1105760.

References

Hindorff L, Sethupathy P, Junkins H, Ramos E, Mehta J, Collins F . Potential etiologic and functional implications of genome-wide association loci for human diseases and traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009; 106(23):9362-7. PMC: 2687147. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0903103106. View

Newman B, Mu H, Butler L, Millikan R, Moorman P, King M . Frequency of breast cancer attributable to BRCA1 in a population-based series of American women. JAMA. 1998; 279(12):915-21. DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.12.915. View

Bonifert T, Karle K, Tonagel F, Batra M, Wilhelm C, Theurer Y . Pure and syndromic optic atrophy explained by deep intronic OPA1 mutations and an intralocus modifier. Brain. 2014; 137(Pt 8):2164-77. PMC: 4107747. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awu165. View

Kulseth M, Lyle R, Rodningen O, Sorte H, Prescott T . Exon trapping analysis of c.301-19G > A in intron 1 of the SHH gene in a patient with a microform of holoprosencephaly. Eur J Med Genet. 2010; 54(2):130-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2010.10.011. View

Abecasis G, Auton A, Brooks L, DePristo M, Durbin R, Handsaker R . An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature. 2012; 491(7422):56-65. PMC: 3498066. DOI: 10.1038/nature11632. View

Plon S, Eccles D, Easton D, Foulkes W, Genuardi M, Greenblatt M . Sequence variant classification and reporting: recommendations for improving the interpretation of cancer susceptibility genetic test results. Hum Mutat. 2008; 29(11):1282-91. PMC: 3075918. DOI: 10.1002/humu.20880. View

Liquori A, Vache C, Baux D, Blanchet C, Hamel C, Malcolm S . Whole USH2A Gene Sequencing Identifies Several New Deep Intronic Mutations. Hum Mutat. 2015; 37(2):184-93. DOI: 10.1002/humu.22926. View

Castoldi E, Duckers C, Radu C, Spiezia L, Rossetto V, Tagariello G . Homozygous F5 deep-intronic splicing mutation resulting in severe factor V deficiency and undetectable thrombin generation in platelet-rich plasma. J Thromb Haemost. 2011; 9(5):959-68. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04237.x. View

Steele-Stallard H, Le Quesne Stabej P, Lenassi E, Luxon L, Claustres M, Roux A . Screening for duplications, deletions and a common intronic mutation detects 35% of second mutations in patients with USH2A monoallelic mutations on Sanger sequencing. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2013; 8:122. PMC: 3751126. DOI: 10.1186/1750-1172-8-122. View

10.

Kent W, Sugnet C, Furey T, Roskin K, Pringle T, Zahler A . The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 2002; 12(6):996-1006. PMC: 186604. DOI: 10.1101/gr.229102. View

11.

Spier I, Horpaopan S, Vogt S, Uhlhaas S, Morak M, Stienen D . Deep intronic APC mutations explain a substantial proportion of patients with familial or early-onset adenomatous polyposis. Hum Mutat. 2012; 33(7):1045-50. DOI: 10.1002/humu.22082. View

12.

Cavalieri S, Pozzi E, Gatti R, Brusco A . Deep-intronic ATM mutation detected by genomic resequencing and corrected in vitro by antisense morpholino oligonucleotide (AMO). Eur J Hum Genet. 2012; 21(7):774-8. PMC: 3722957. DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.266. View

13.

Pritchard C, Smith C, Salipante S, Lee M, Thornton A, Nord A . ColoSeq provides comprehensive lynch and polyposis syndrome mutational analysis using massively parallel sequencing. J Mol Diagn. 2012; 14(4):357-66. PMC: 3391416. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2012.03.002. View

14.

Reese M, Eeckman F, Kulp D, Haussler D . Improved splice site detection in Genie. J Comput Biol. 1997; 4(3):311-23. DOI: 10.1089/cmb.1997.4.311. View

15.

Foley S, Rios J, Mgbemena V, Robinson L, Hampel H, Toland A . Use of Whole Genome Sequencing for Diagnosis and Discovery in the Cancer Genetics Clinic. EBioMedicine. 2015; 2(1):74-81. PMC: 4444225. DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2014.12.003. View

16.

Palagano E, Blair H, Pangrazio A, Tourkova I, Strina D, Angius A . Buried in the Middle but Guilty: Intronic Mutations in the TCIRG1 Gene Cause Human Autosomal Recessive Osteopetrosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2015; 30(10):1814-21. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.2517. View

17.

Tung N, Battelli C, Allen B, Kaldate R, Bhatnagar S, Bowles K . Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing using next-generation sequencing with a 25-gene panel. Cancer. 2014; 121(1):25-33. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29010. View

18.

Takeshima Y, Yagi M, Okizuka Y, Awano H, Zhang Z, Yamauchi Y . Mutation spectrum of the dystrophin gene in 442 Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy cases from one Japanese referral center. J Hum Genet. 2010; 55(6):379-88. DOI: 10.1038/jhg.2010.49. View

19.

Bholah Z, Smith M, Byers H, Miles E, Evans D, Newman W . Intronic splicing mutations in PTCH1 cause Gorlin syndrome. Fam Cancer. 2014; 13(3):477-80. DOI: 10.1007/s10689-014-9712-9. View

20.

Pritchard C, Salipante S, Koehler K, Smith C, Scroggins S, Wood B . Validation and implementation of targeted capture and sequencing for the detection of actionable mutation, copy number variation, and gene rearrangement in clinical cancer specimens. J Mol Diagn. 2013; 16(1):56-67. PMC: 3873496. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2013.08.004. View