-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Why all mutations are judged Benign or Uncertain significance? #78
Comments
Hi! Have you solved your problem? I encounter the same problem now. When I annotate the variants with the Intervar database in ANNOVAR, many were predicted as pathogenic. But when I use InterVar to predict the same variants, all of them were predicted as benign or VUS. It confuses me a lot. |
When I switched to hg38, InterVar predicts no pathogenic variants; all end up as benign or VUS. I'm using Intervar_20210727, with default ANNOVAR databases as hardcoded in intervar.py. |
how you run the hg38 version, please provide the cmd(maybe post the screen output) and also some top lines of your variant input. |
I hope this is helpful |
Here is the stdout output of intervar after the run |
I used intervar to predict mutations and found no pathogenic entries, what went wrong?
In addition, I found that some loci are contradictory, such as the situation that PM1 and BS1 are satisfied at the same time? How to deal with such a result?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: