<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Rowlands C</submitter><funding>Cancer Research UK</funding><funding>Medical Research Council</funding><funding>National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)</funding><funding>Health Education England</funding><funding>Wellcome Trust</funding><pagination>20607</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8523691</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>11(1)</volume><pubmed_abstract>The development of computational methods to assess pathogenicity of pre-messenger RNA splicing variants is critical for diagnosis of human disease. We assessed the capability of eight algorithms, and a consensus approach, to prioritize 249 variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) that underwent splicing functional analyses. The capability of algorithms to differentiate VUSs away from the immediate splice site as being 'pathogenic' or 'benign' is likely to have substantial impact on diagnostic testing. We show that SpliceAI is the best single strategy in this regard, but that combined usage of tools using a weighted approach can increase accuracy further. We incorporated prioritization strategies alongside diagnostic testing for rare disorders. We show that 15% of 2783 referred individuals</pubmed_abstract><journal>Scientific reports</journal><pubmed_title>Comparison of in silico strategies to prioritize rare genomic variants impacting RNA splicing for the diagnosis of genomic disorders.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8523691</pmcid><funding_grant_id>MR/M009203/1</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>MC_EX_MR/M009203/1</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>MC_PC_14089</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>RP-2016-07-011</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>200990/Z/16/Z</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>CL-2017-06-001</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>HDR-9004</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Clayton-Smith J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sergouniotis P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Savage K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Taylor Tavares AL</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gossan N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wai HA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bevers R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Fowler T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chan GC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Williams E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Pullinger J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lopez FJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ellingford JM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hardcastle C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Maleady-Crowe F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Arno G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Genomics England Research Consortium</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Baralle D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lahnstein L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hubbard TJP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Welland MJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Minneci F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Stuckey A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hirst RA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sieghart A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Caulfield MJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hamblin A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mueller M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thomas HB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>O'Donovan P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>O'Keefe RT</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ambrose JC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Scott RH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tucci A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Moutsianas L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bleda M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Leigh SEA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Patch C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thomas ERA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Brittain H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jones LJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Webster AR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Douglas AGL</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Arumugam P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jones E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kasperaviciute D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Henderson S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Pereira MB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gomes-Silva B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rogers T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Boardman-Pretty F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>McEntagart M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rowlands C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kayikci M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ramsden S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thompson SR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Murugaesu N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Leong IUS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kousathanas A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tanguy M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Smith SC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jackson R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Giess A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Newman WG</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rendon A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Webb K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sosinsky A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>O'Callaghan C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Perez-Gil D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Need AC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sawant K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Black GCM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Boustred CR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Beaman G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Siddiq A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Campbell C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Odhams CA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Witkowsa K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lord J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rahim T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wood SM</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Comparison of in silico strategies to prioritize rare genomic variants impacting RNA splicing for the diagnosis of genomic disorders.</name><description>The development of computational methods to assess pathogenicity of pre-messenger RNA splicing variants is critical for diagnosis of human disease. We assessed the capability of eight algorithms, and a consensus approach, to prioritize 249 variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) that underwent splicing functional analyses. The capability of algorithms to differentiate VUSs away from the immediate splice site as being 'pathogenic' or 'benign' is likely to have substantial impact on diagnostic testing. We show that SpliceAI is the best single strategy in this regard, but that combined usage of tools using a weighted approach can increase accuracy further. We incorporated prioritization strategies alongside diagnostic testing for rare disorders. We show that 15% of 2783 referred individuals</description><dates><release>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2021 Oct</publication><modification>2026-07-14T14:36:14.144Z</modification><creation>2024-11-08T11:39:18.202Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8523691</accession><cross_references><pubmed>34663891</pubmed><doi>10.1038/s41598-021-99747-2</doi></cross_references></HashMap>