169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35976049)
1. Performance evaluation of computational methods for splice-disrupting variants and improving the performance using the machine learning-based framework.
Liu H; Dai J; Li K; Sun Y; Wei H; Wang H; Zhao C; Wang DW
Brief Bioinform; 2022 Sep; 23(5):. PubMed ID: 35976049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Combining genetic constraint with predictions of alternative splicing to prioritize deleterious splicing in rare disease studies.
Cormier MJ; Pedersen BS; Bayrak-Toydemir P; Quinlan AR
BMC Bioinformatics; 2022 Nov; 23(1):482. PubMed ID: 36376793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. CI-SpliceAI-Improving machine learning predictions of disease causing splicing variants using curated alternative splice sites.
Strauch Y; Lord J; Niranjan M; Baralle D
PLoS One; 2022; 17(6):e0269159. PubMed ID: 35657932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. MutPred Splice: machine learning-based prediction of exonic variants that disrupt splicing.
Mort M; Sterne-Weiler T; Li B; Ball EV; Cooper DN; Radivojac P; Sanford JR; Mooney SD
Genome Biol; 2014 Jan; 15(1):R19. PubMed ID: 24451234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Interpretable prioritization of splice variants in diagnostic next-generation sequencing.
Danis D; Jacobsen JOB; Carmody LC; Gargano MA; McMurry JA; Hegde A; Haendel MA; Valentini G; Smedley D; Robinson PN
Am J Hum Genet; 2021 Sep; 108(9):1564-1577. PubMed ID: 34289339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. CADD-Splice-improving genome-wide variant effect prediction using deep learning-derived splice scores.
Rentzsch P; Schubach M; Shendure J; Kircher M
Genome Med; 2021 Feb; 13(1):31. PubMed ID: 33618777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Benchmarking deep learning splice prediction tools using functional splice assays.
Riepe TV; Khan M; Roosing S; Cremers FPM; 't Hoen PAC
Hum Mutat; 2021 Jul; 42(7):799-810. PubMed ID: 33942434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Systematic Computational Identification of Variants That Activate Exonic and Intronic Cryptic Splice Sites.
Lee M; Roos P; Sharma N; Atalar M; Evans TA; Pellicore MJ; Davis E; Lam AN; Stanley SE; Khalil SE; Solomon GM; Walker D; Raraigh KS; Vecchio-Pagan B; Armanios M; Cutting GR
Am J Hum Genet; 2017 May; 100(5):751-765. PubMed ID: 28475858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Benchmarking splice variant prediction algorithms using massively parallel splicing assays.
Smith C; Kitzman JO
Genome Biol; 2023 Dec; 24(1):294. PubMed ID: 38129864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Genomic features defining exonic variants that modulate splicing.
Woolfe A; Mullikin JC; Elnitski L
Genome Biol; 2010; 11(2):R20. PubMed ID: 20158892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. CAGI 5 splicing challenge: Improved exon skipping and intron retention predictions with MMSplice.
Cheng J; Çelik MH; Nguyen TYD; Avsec Ž; Gagneur J
Hum Mutat; 2019 Sep; 40(9):1243-1251. PubMed ID: 31070280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. High-throughput analysis revealed mutations' diverging effects on
Souček P; Réblová K; Kramárek M; Radová L; Grymová T; Hujová P; Kováčová T; Lexa M; Grodecká L; Freiberger T
RNA Biol; 2019 Oct; 16(10):1364-1376. PubMed ID: 31213135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. SPiP: Splicing Prediction Pipeline, a machine learning tool for massive detection of exonic and intronic variant effects on mRNA splicing.
Leman R; Parfait B; Vidaud D; Girodon E; Pacot L; Le Gac G; Ka C; Ferec C; Fichou Y; Quesnelle C; Aucouturier C; Muller E; Vaur D; Castera L; Boulouard F; Ricou A; Tubeuf H; Soukarieh O; Gaildrat P; Riant F; Guillaud-Bataille M; Caputo SM; Caux-Moncoutier V; Boutry-Kryza N; Bonnet-Dorion F; Schultz I; Rossing M; Quenez O; Goldenberg L; Harter V; Parsons MT; Spurdle AB; Frébourg T; Martins A; Houdayer C; Krieger S
Hum Mutat; 2022 Dec; 43(12):2308-2323. PubMed ID: 36273432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Contribution of Noncanonical Splice Variants to
Patel PN; Ito K; Willcox JAL; Haghighi A; Jang MY; Gorham JM; DePalma SR; Lam L; McDonough B; Johnson R; Lakdawala NK; Roberts A; Barton PJR; Cook SA; Fatkin D; Seidman CE; Seidman JG
Circ Genom Precis Med; 2021 Oct; 14(5):e003389. PubMed ID: 34461741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. MMSplice: modular modeling improves the predictions of genetic variant effects on splicing.
Cheng J; Nguyen TYD; Cygan KJ; Çelik MH; Fairbrother WG; Avsec Ž; Gagneur J
Genome Biol; 2019 Mar; 20(1):48. PubMed ID: 30823901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Blood RNA analysis can increase clinical diagnostic rate and resolve variants of uncertain significance.
Wai HA; Lord J; Lyon M; Gunning A; Kelly H; Cibin P; Seaby EG; Spiers-Fitzgerald K; Lye J; Ellard S; Thomas NS; Bunyan DJ; Douglas AGL; Baralle D;
Genet Med; 2020 Jun; 22(6):1005-1014. PubMed ID: 32123317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predicting the change of exon splicing caused by genetic variant using support vector regression.
Chen K; Lu Y; Zhao H; Yang Y
Hum Mutat; 2019 Sep; 40(9):1235-1242. PubMed ID: 31070294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mechanism and modeling of human disease-associated near-exon intronic variants that perturb RNA splicing.
Chiang HL; Chen YT; Su JY; Lin HN; Yu CA; Hung YJ; Wang YL; Huang YT; Lin CL
Nat Struct Mol Biol; 2022 Nov; 29(11):1043-1055. PubMed ID: 36303034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predicting the effect of variants on splicing using Convolutional Neural Networks.
Thanapattheerakul T; Engchuan W; Chan JH
PeerJ; 2020; 8():e9470. PubMed ID: 32704450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Hotspot exons are common targets of splicing perturbations.
Glidden DT; Buerer JL; Saueressig CF; Fairbrother WG
Nat Commun; 2021 May; 12(1):2756. PubMed ID: 33980843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
