Disease-Specific Prediction of Missense Variant Pathogenicity with DNA Language Models and Graph Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate prediction of the impact of genetic variants on human health is of paramount importance to clinical genetics and precision medicine. Recent machine learning (ML) studies have tried to predict variant pathogenicity with different levels of success. However, most missense variants identified on a clinical basis are still classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Our approach allows for the interpretation of a variant for a specific disease and, thus, for the integration of disease-specific domain knowledge. We utilize a comprehensive knowledge graph, with 11 types of interconnected biomedical entities at diverse biomolecular and clinical levels, to classify missense variants from ClinVar. We use BioBERT to generate embeddings of biomedical features for each node in the graph, as well as DNA language models to embed variant features directly from genomic sequence. Next, we train a two-stage architecture consisting of a graph convolutional neural network to encode biological relationships. A neural network is then used as the classifier to predict disease-specific pathogenicity of variants, essentially predicting edges between variant and disease nodes. We compare performance across different versions of our model, obtaining prediction-balanced accuracies as high as 85.6% (sensitivity: 90.5%; NPV: 89.8%) and discuss how our work can inform future studies in this area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".