Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 11;25(4):404–409. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2016.199

Table 1. Scoring scheme for variant evaluation (adapted from Hertz et al. 31 ).

Parameter Score
Coding effect
 Nonsense 24
 Frameshift 24
 Splice sites
  ±1/±5 24
  ±2/±3 12
  All others 0
 Missense 0
   
In silico protein prediction
 AGVGD
  C65 4
  C55 3.2
  C35 2.4
  C25 1.6
  C15 0.8
  C0 0
  NA 0
 Grantham distance
  >140 4
  70–140 2
  <70 0
  NA 0
 SIFT
  Deleterious 4
  Good 0
  NA 0
 MAPP
  Bad 4
  Good 0
  NA 0
 Polyphen2
  Probably damaging 4
  Possibly damaging 2
  Benign 0
 MutationTaster
  Disease causing 4
  Polymorphism 0
  NA 0
   
MAF
 ESP EAMAF  
  ≤0.001 8
  0.001<freq≤0.002 5.3
  0.002<freq≤0.01 2.6
  >0.01 0
  NA 0
 ExAC EURNFMAF
  ≤0.001 8
  0.001<freq≤0.002 5.3
  0.002<freq≤0.01 2.6
  >0.01 0
  NA 0
 1000 Genomes Project EURMAF
  ≤0.001 8
  0.001<freq≤0.002 5.3
  0.002<freq≤0.01 2.6
  >0.01 0
  NA 0

Abbreviations: AGVGD, align Grantham variation and Grantham deviation32; ESP EAMAF, MAF in European American population in NHLBI GO Exome Sequencing Project37; ExAC EURNFMAF, MAF in European (non-Finnish) population in exome aggregation consortium39; MAF, minor allele frequency; MAPP, multivariate analysis of protein polymorphism prediction34; NA, not available; Polyphen2, polymorphism phenotyping v2 (ref. 35); SIFT, sorting intolerant from tolerant prediction33; MutationTaster36; 1000 Genomes Project EURMAF, MAF in European population in 1000 Genomes Project.38