Machine learning reveals genetic modifiers of the immune microenvironment of cancer.

Heritability in the immune tumor microenvironment (iTME) has been widely observed yet remains largely uncharacterized. Here, we developed a machine learning approach to map iTME modifiers within loci from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) for breast cancer (BrCa) incidence. A random forest model was trained on a positive set of immune-oncology (I-O) targets, and then used to assign I-O target probability scores to 1,362 candidate genes in linkage disequilibrium with 155 BrCa GWAS loci. Cluster analysis of the most probable candidates revealed two subfamilies of genes related to effector functions and adaptive immune responses, suggesting that iTME modifiers impact multiple aspects of anticancer immunity. Two of the top ranking BrCa candidates, LSP1 and TLR1, were orthogonally validated as iTME modifiers using BrCa patient biopsies and comparative mapping studies, respectively. Collectively, these data demonstrate a robust and flexible framework for functionally fine-mapping GWAS risk loci to identify translatable therapeutic targets.

Variant effect predictions capture some aspects of deep mutational scanning experiments.

BACKGROUND: Deep mutational scanning (DMS) studies exploit the mutational landscape of sequence variation by systematically and comprehensively assaying the effect of single amino acid variants (SAVs; also referred to as missense mutations, or non-synonymous Single Nucleotide Variants - missense SNVs or nsSNVs) for particular proteins. We assembled SAV annotations from 22 different DMS experiments and normalized the effect scores to evaluate variant effect prediction methods. Three trained on traditional variant effect data (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, SNAP2), a regression method optimized on DMS data (Envision), and a naïve prediction using conservation information from homologs. RESULTS: On a set of 32,981 SAVs, all methods captured some aspects of the experimental effect scores, albeit not the same. Traditional methods such as SNAP2 correlated slightly more with measurements and better classified binary states (effect or neutral). Envision appeared to better estimate the precise degree of effect. Most surprising was that the simple naïve conservation approach using PSI-BLAST in many cases outperformed other methods. All methods captured beneficial effects (gain-of-function) significantly worse than deleterious (loss-of-function). For the few proteins with multiple independent experimental measurements, experiments differed substantially, but agreed more with each other than with predictions. CONCLUSIONS: DMS provides a new powerful experimental means of understanding the dynamics of the protein sequence space. As always, promising new beginnings have to overcome challenges. While our results demonstrated that DMS will be crucial to improve variant effect prediction methods, data diversity hindered simplification and generalization.

Common sequence variants affect molecular function more than rare variants?

Any two unrelated individuals differ by about 10,000 single amino acid variants (SAVs). Do these impact molecular function? Experimental answers cannot answer comprehensively, while state-of-the-art prediction methods can. We predicted the functional impacts of SAVs within human and for variants between human and other species. Several surprising results stood out. Firstly, four methods (CADD, PolyPhen-2, SIFT, and SNAP2) agreed within 10 percentage points on the percentage of rare SAVs predicted with effect. However, they differed substantially for the common SAVs: SNAP2 predicted, on average, more effect for common than for rare SAVs. Given the large ExAC data sets sampling 60,706 individuals, the differences were extremely significant (p-value < 2.2e-16). We provided evidence that SNAP2 might be closer to reality for common SAVs than the other methods, due to its different focus in development. Secondly, we predicted significantly higher fractions of SAVs with effect between healthy individuals than between species; the difference increased for more distantly related species. The same trends were maintained for subsets of only housekeeping proteins and when moving from exomes of 1,000 to 60,000 individuals. SAVs frozen at speciation might maintain protein function, while many variants within a species might bring about crucial changes, for better or worse.

Evaluation of transmembrane helix predictions in 2014.

Experimental structure determination continues to be challenging for membrane proteins. Computational prediction methods are therefore needed and widely used to supplement experimental data. Here, we re-examined the state of the art in transmembrane helix prediction based on a nonredundant dataset with 190 high-resolution structures. Analyzing 12 widely-used and well-known methods using a stringent performance measure, we largely confirmed the expected high level of performance. On the other hand, all methods performed worse for proteins that could not have been used for development. A few results stood out: First, all methods predicted proteins in eukaryotes better than those in bacteria. Second, methods worked less well for proteins with many transmembrane helices. Third, most methods correctly discriminated between soluble and transmembrane proteins. However, several older methods often mistook signal peptides for transmembrane helices. Some newer methods have overcome this shortcoming. In our hands, PolyPhobius and MEMSAT-SVM outperformed other methods.