145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35364305)
1. Assessment of 13 in silico pathogenicity methods on cancer-related variants.
Yazar M; Ozbek P
Comput Biol Med; 2022 Jun; 145():105434. PubMed ID: 35364305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. REVEL: An Ensemble Method for Predicting the Pathogenicity of Rare Missense Variants.
Ioannidis NM; Rothstein JH; Pejaver V; Middha S; McDonnell SK; Baheti S; Musolf A; Li Q; Holzinger E; Karyadi D; Cannon-Albright LA; Teerlink CC; Stanford JL; Isaacs WB; Xu J; Cooney KA; Lange EM; Schleutker J; Carpten JD; Powell IJ; Cussenot O; Cancel-Tassin G; Giles GG; MacInnis RJ; Maier C; Hsieh CL; Wiklund F; Catalona WJ; Foulkes WD; Mandal D; Eeles RA; Kote-Jarai Z; Bustamante CD; Schaid DJ; Hastie T; Ostrander EA; Bailey-Wilson JE; Radivojac P; Thibodeau SN; Whittemore AS; Sieh W
Am J Hum Genet; 2016 Oct; 99(4):877-885. PubMed ID: 27666373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluating the Performance of In silico Tools for PRRT2 Missense Variants.
Sun H; Song W; Li B
Comb Chem High Throughput Screen; 2024 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 38910474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Performance of mutation pathogenicity prediction tools on missense variants associated with 46,XY differences of sex development.
Montenegro LR; Lerário AM; Nishi MY; Jorge AAL; Mendonca BB
Clinics (Sao Paulo); 2021; 76():e2052. PubMed ID: 33503178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of Predictive
Pshennikova VG; Barashkov NA; Romanov GP; Teryutin FM; Solov'ev AV; Gotovtsev NN; Nikanorova AA; Nakhodkin SS; Sazonov NN; Morozov IV; Bondar AA; Dzhemileva LU; Khusnutdinova EK; Posukh OL; Fedorova SA
ScientificWorldJournal; 2019; 2019():5198931. PubMed ID: 31015822
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of in silico pathogenicity prediction tools for the classification of small in-frame indels.
Cannon S; Williams M; Gunning AC; Wright CF
BMC Med Genomics; 2023 Feb; 16(1):36. PubMed ID: 36855133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Pathogenicity Prediction Tools on Somatic Variants.
Suybeng V; Koeppel F; Harlé A; Rouleau E
J Mol Diagn; 2020 Dec; 22(12):1383-1392. PubMed ID: 33011441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. IMHOTEP-a composite score integrating popular tools for predicting the functional consequences of non-synonymous sequence variants.
Knecht C; Mort M; Junge O; Cooper DN; Krawczak M; Caliebe A
Nucleic Acids Res; 2017 Feb; 45(3):e13. PubMed ID: 28180317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of the predictive accuracy of five in silico prediction tools, alone or in combination, and two metaservers to classify long QT syndrome gene mutations.
Leong IU; Stuckey A; Lai D; Skinner JR; Love DR
BMC Med Genet; 2015 May; 16():34. PubMed ID: 25967940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison and integration of deleteriousness prediction methods for nonsynonymous SNVs in whole exome sequencing studies.
Dong C; Wei P; Jian X; Gibbs R; Boerwinkle E; Wang K; Liu X
Hum Mol Genet; 2015 Apr; 24(8):2125-37. PubMed ID: 25552646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Novel gene-specific Bayesian Gaussian mixture model to predict the missense variants pathogenicity of Sanfilippo syndrome.
Mohammed EEA; Fayez AG; Abdelfattah NM; Fateen E
Sci Rep; 2024 May; 14(1):12148. PubMed ID: 38802532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Performance of in silico prediction tools for the classification of rare BRCA1/2 missense variants in clinical diagnostics.
Ernst C; Hahnen E; Engel C; Nothnagel M; Weber J; Schmutzler RK; Hauke J
BMC Med Genomics; 2018 Mar; 11(1):35. PubMed ID: 29580235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In silico analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 missense variants and the relevance in molecular genetic testing.
Poon KS
Sci Rep; 2021 May; 11(1):11114. PubMed ID: 34045478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The evaluation of tools used to predict the impact of missense variants is hindered by two types of circularity.
Grimm DG; Azencott CA; Aicheler F; Gieraths U; MacArthur DG; Samocha KE; Cooper DN; Stenson PD; Daly MJ; Smoller JW; Duncan LE; Borgwardt KM
Hum Mutat; 2015 May; 36(5):513-23. PubMed ID: 25684150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Curated multiple sequence alignment for the Adenomatous Polyposis Coli (APC) gene and accuracy of in silico pathogenicity predictions.
Karabachev AD; Martini DJ; Hermel DJ; Solcz D; Richardson ME; Pesaran T; Sarkar IN; Greenblatt MS
PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0233673. PubMed ID: 32750050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. dbNSFP v3.0: A One-Stop Database of Functional Predictions and Annotations for Human Nonsynonymous and Splice-Site SNVs.
Liu X; Wu C; Li C; Boerwinkle E
Hum Mutat; 2016 Mar; 37(3):235-41. PubMed ID: 26555599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. MutTMPredictor: Robust and accurate cascade XGBoost classifier for prediction of mutations in transmembrane proteins.
Ge F; Zhu YH; Xu J; Muhammad A; Song J; Yu DJ
Comput Struct Biotechnol J; 2021; 19():6400-6416. PubMed ID: 34938415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Prediction of pathogenic single amino acid substitutions using molecular fragment descriptors.
Zadorozhny A; Smirnov A; Filimonov D; Lagunin A
Bioinformatics; 2023 Aug; 39(8):. PubMed ID: 37535750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. REVEL and BayesDel outperform other in silico meta-predictors for clinical variant classification.
Tian Y; Pesaran T; Chamberlin A; Fenwick RB; Li S; Gau CL; Chao EC; Lu HM; Black MH; Qian D
Sci Rep; 2019 Sep; 9(1):12752. PubMed ID: 31484976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. In-Silico Analyses of Nonsynonymous Variants in the BRCA1 Gene.
Arshad S; Ishaque I; Mumtaz S; Rashid MU; Malkani N
Biochem Genet; 2021 Dec; 59(6):1506-1526. PubMed ID: 33945048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
