[ensembl-dev] PolyPhen2 prediction discrepancies between VEP 88 and dbNSFP v3.0
Sarah Hunt
seh at ebi.ac.uk
Tue Jun 13 12:21:26 BST 2017
Hi Brad,
We do find differences between different PolyPhen analyses, dependent on
code version and protein databases used. Our GRCh37 database will be
updated to the latest PolyPhen version in July, so do expect some
changes. There are a number of genes returning unknown classifications
in our GRCh37 databases, which have calls in our GRCh38 databases which
have already been updated to the newer version, so we hope the update
improves GRCh37 coverage. An example from your list:
http://grch37.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Variation/Mappings?db=core;r=1:103427257-103428257;v=rs754273408;vdb=variation;vf=119985449
http://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Variation/Mappings?db=core;r=1:102961701-102962701;v=rs754273408;vdb=variation;vf=119958041
Thanks for the examples, but I find them a little confusing. Don't 2 of
them (10-73377145 & 1-103462662) show agreement across all three versions?
Best wishes,
Sarah
On 12/06/2017 17:05, Crone, Bradley wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> I'm working with PolyPhen2 scores and predictions in VEP 88 and
> comparing these back to scores reported in dbNSFP v3.0.
>
> I find a large number of discrepancies between HumDiv scores from VEP
> and dbNSFP. I've looked at a small subset of 10 mismatches.
>
> Directly comparing scores/predictions with PolyPhen2's website, all
> PolyPhen2 scores match with a dbNSFP score, and not a VEP score:
>
>
> CHROM POS REF ALT GENE VEP-FEATURE VEP-IMPACT
> VEP_CSQ VEP_POLYPHEN_SCORE VEP_POLYPHEN_PRED
> DBNSFP_POLYPHEN2_HDIV_SCORE DBNSFP_POLYPHEN2_HDIV_PRED
> pph2_prob pph2_FPR pph2_TPR
> 2 73679572 C A ALMS1 NM_015120.4 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0.952 P 0.987,0.972,0.026 D,D,B 0.026
> 0.188 0.949
> 1 216011417 A T USH2A NM_206933.2 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0.155 B 0.933 P 0.933 0.0573
> 0.804
> 12 48398104 T C COL2A1 NM_001844.4 HIGH
> start_lost 0 U 0.219,0.14 B 0.14 0.136 0.923
> 1 103427757 C G COL11A1 NM_080629.2 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0 U 0.999 D 0.999 0.00574
> 0.136
> 12 48377197 G T COL2A1 NM_001844.4 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0.784 P 0.001,0.0 B 0 1
> 1
> 6 70981396 C A COL9A1 NM_001851.4 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0.555 P 0.31,0.0 B 0.31 0.112
> 0.904
> 10 73377145 G A CDH23 NM_001171930.1 MODERATE
> missense_variant 1 P 1.0,1.0,0.998 D 1 0.00026
> 0.00018
> 1 216496954 T C USH2A NM_206933.2 MODERATE
> missense_variant 1 P 0.971,0.413 D,B 0.413
> 0.103 0.893
> 17 18064707 C A MYO15A NM_016239.3 MODERATE
> missense_variant 0 U 0.941,0.761,0.165,0.523,0.981,0.953
> P,P,B,P,D,P 0.523 0.0959 0.882
> 1 103462662 C T COL11A1 NM_001190709.1 MODERATE
> missense_variant 1 P 1.0 D 1 0.00026 0.00018
>
> Any idea for this discrepancy?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brad
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Notice: This UI Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered
> by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and
> is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it
> is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you
> are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete or destroy all copies of the original message
> and attachments thereto. Email sent to or from UI Health Care may be
> retained as required by law or regulation. Thank you.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list Dev at ensembl.org
> Posting guidelines and subscribe/unsubscribe info: http://lists.ensembl.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> Ensembl Blog: http://www.ensembl.info/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ensembl.org/pipermail/dev_ensembl.org/attachments/20170613/4670ceb9/attachment.html>
More information about the Dev
mailing list