Skip to content
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

bad p. for silent changes #317

Closed
reece opened this issue Mar 14, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

bad p. for silent changes #317

reece opened this issue Mar 14, 2016 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@reece
Copy link
Member

reece commented Mar 14, 2016

Originally reported by: Vivien Deshaies (Bitbucket: vdeshaies, GitHub: viv-1)


Hello,

It seems that there is a problem with p. notation in the module for silent changes.

Example

#!python
> variantmapper = hgvs.variantmapper.EasyVariantMapper(hdp, primary_assembly='GRCh37')

> str(variantmapper.c_to_p(hgvsparser.parse_hgvs_variant('NM_000059.3:c.7791A>G')))
'NP_000050.2:p.(=)'

According to hgvs recommendations this case should be reported as "NP_000050.2:p.Lys2597="

This problem is present in 0.4.4 version. Do you plan to fix this ?
Do you want me to create a patch ?

Best regards,

Vivien


@reece
Copy link
Member Author

reece commented Mar 14, 2016

Original comment by Vivien Deshaies (Bitbucket: vdeshaies, GitHub: viv-1):


Here is the link to the corresponding hgvs recommendation : http://www.hgvs.org/mutnomen/recs-prot.html

@reece
Copy link
Member Author

reece commented Mar 14, 2016

Original comment by Reece Hart (Bitbucket: reece, GitHub: reece):


Hi Vivien- I always appreciate patches/PRs!
Thanks,
Reece

@reece
Copy link
Member Author

reece commented Mar 30, 2016

Original comment by Martijn Vermaat (Bitbucket: martijnvermaat, GitHub: martijnvermaat):


That page reads (emphasis mine):

Description of so called "silent" changes can be described using p.(Leu54=).

That's not the same as should. The page also reads:

p.(=) - protein has not been analysed, but no change is expected

Which I think applies to this case, so p.(=) would (also) be valid.

That said, HGVS on protein level is often confusing to me, and on the new website the wording is again different (I think the Protein / Substitution page applies).

By the way, p.Lys2597= should include parentheses (meaning not tested): p.(Lys2597=).

@reece
Copy link
Member Author

reece commented Sep 22, 2016

Original comment by Reece Hart (Bitbucket: reece, GitHub: reece):


This issue is nearly complete. There's one corner case for us to consider. See

https://bitbucket.org/biocommons/hgvs/src/64b12c9dca154a735711f591948a947c400fc9d6/tests/test_issues.py?at=default&fileviewer=file-view-default#test_issues.py-118

The question is about what should happen when there's an MNV that spans multiple AAs. In that example, a dinucleotide MNV spans the 3rd and 1st positions of adjacent exons. Currently, hgvs translates this as p.(Gly7=), even though Arg8 was also changed. I believe this should read as p.(Arg7_Glu8=). If not that, then perhaps we should be returning p.(=) instead. (As Martijn correctly noted, p.(=) is valid, but I suspect we all prefer the specificity of the located variant forms.)

Comments?

@reece
Copy link
Member Author

reece commented Sep 23, 2016

Original comment by Reece Hart (Bitbucket: reece, GitHub: reece):


I've decided to close this issue since it solves the major issue. I opened issue #370 to handle the case of multicodon changes.

@reece reece added major enhancement New feature or request labels Mar 9, 2017
@reece reece added this to the 0.5.0 milestone Mar 9, 2017
@reece reece closed this as completed Mar 9, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant