Personal transcriptome variation is poorly explained by current genomic deep learning models

17Citations
Citations of this article
76Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Genomic deep learning models can predict genome-wide epigenetic features and gene expression levels directly from DNA sequence. While current models perform well at predicting gene expression levels across genes in different cell types from the reference genome, their ability to explain expression variation between individuals due to cis-regulatory genetic variants remains largely unexplored. Here, we evaluate four state-of-the-art models on paired personal genome and transcriptome data and find limited performance when explaining variation in expression across individuals. In addition, models often fail to predict the correct direction of effect of cis-regulatory genetic variation on expression.

References Powered by Scopus

A global reference for human genetic variation

11666Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools

5670Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Predicting effects of noncoding variants with deep learning-based sequence model

1477Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Big data and deep learning for RNA biology

10Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Current approaches to genomic deep learning struggle to fully capture human genetic variation

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Interpreting cis-regulatory interactions from large-scale deep neural networks

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Huang, C., Shuai, R. W., Baokar, P., Chung, R., Rastogi, R., Kathail, P., & Ioannidis, N. M. (2023). Personal transcriptome variation is poorly explained by current genomic deep learning models. Nature Genetics, 55(12), 2056–2059. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-023-01574-w

Readers over time

‘23‘24‘2509182736

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 14

47%

Professor / Associate Prof. 8

27%

Researcher 8

27%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 23

68%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6

18%

Computer Science 3

9%

Engineering 2

6%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0