Configuration

CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)

CADD deleteriousness scores for in-frame indels.

Overview

An explanatory profile has not yet been reviewed for this record.

Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.

Evaluations and results

4 evaluations · 4 results. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Protocol: ClinVar in-frame indel pathogenicity, ROC-AUC (Brandes et al. 2023 Fig. 6b, Supplementary Table 2)

Sorted by AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar all in-frame indels; zero-shot) (higher is better). The best value in each column is highlighted. Decimals are rounded for display; each value links to the printed value and its source.

Tested configuration	Protocol and dataset	AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar all in-frame indels; zero-shot)	AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar deletion-insertions; zero-shot)	AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar deletions; zero-shot)	AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar insertions; zero-shot)
CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)Evaluation	ClinVar in-frame indels, pathogenic vs benign (Brandes et al. 2023)	0.836	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported
CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)Evaluation	ClinVar in-frame deletions (Brandes et al. 2023)	Not reported	Not reported	0.848	Not reported
CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)Evaluation	ClinVar in-frame deletion-insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)	Not reported	0.671	Not reported	Not reported
CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)Evaluation	ClinVar in-frame insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	0.757

All 4 result rows with coverage, uncertainty and sources

Filter evaluations

Tested model or methodProtocolDatasetEvaluation setupMetricEvidence origin

Applied filters: All linked evaluations

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configuration	Protocol and dataset	Finding	Evidence and details
Configuration: CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)	Protocol: ClinVar in-frame indel pathogenicity, ROC-AUC (Brandes et al. 2023 Fig. 6b, Supplementary Table 2) Dataset: ClinVar in-frame indels, pathogenic vs benign (Brandes et al. 2023)	0.836 AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar all in-frame indels; zero-shot) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Methods, coverage and source CADD on all in-frame indels (Brandes et al. 2023) gfm-guides-20261014-esm1b-protocol-clinvar-inframe-indels Aggregation: Not reported Brandes et al. 2023 Supplementary Table 2: full benchmark evaluations of ESM1b and all other methods · Supplementary Table 2 sheet 'Table_of_results_indels' cell B5, row 'CADD', column 'AUC_indels'
Configuration: CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)	Protocol: ClinVar in-frame indel pathogenicity, ROC-AUC (Brandes et al. 2023 Fig. 6b, Supplementary Table 2) Dataset subset: ClinVar in-frame deletions (Brandes et al. 2023)	0.848 AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar deletions; zero-shot) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Methods, coverage and source CADD on deletions (Brandes et al. 2023) gfm-guides-20261014-esm1b-protocol-clinvar-inframe-indels Aggregation: Not reported Brandes et al. 2023 Supplementary Table 2: full benchmark evaluations of ESM1b and all other methods · Supplementary Table 2 sheet 'Table_of_results_indels' cell D5, row 'CADD', column 'AUC_del'
Configuration: CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)	Protocol: ClinVar in-frame indel pathogenicity, ROC-AUC (Brandes et al. 2023 Fig. 6b, Supplementary Table 2) Dataset subset: ClinVar in-frame deletion-insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)	0.671 AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar deletion-insertions; zero-shot) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Methods, coverage and source CADD on deletion-insertions (Brandes et al. 2023) gfm-guides-20261014-esm1b-protocol-clinvar-inframe-indels Aggregation: Not reported Brandes et al. 2023 Supplementary Table 2: full benchmark evaluations of ESM1b and all other methods · Supplementary Table 2 sheet 'Table_of_results_indels' cell E5, row 'CADD', column 'AUC_delins'
Configuration: CADD in-frame indel scores (Brandes et al. 2023)	Protocol: ClinVar in-frame indel pathogenicity, ROC-AUC (Brandes et al. 2023 Fig. 6b, Supplementary Table 2) Dataset subset: ClinVar in-frame insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)	0.757 AUROC (ROC-AUC, pathogenic versus benign ClinVar insertions; zero-shot) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Methods, coverage and source CADD on insertions (Brandes et al. 2023) gfm-guides-20261014-esm1b-protocol-clinvar-inframe-indels Aggregation: Not reported Brandes et al. 2023 Supplementary Table 2: full benchmark evaluations of ESM1b and all other methods · Supplementary Table 2 sheet 'Table_of_results_indels' cell C5, row 'CADD', column 'AUC_ins'

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6.

Use this configuration

How it works, versions and access

Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions

Evidence

Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.

Evidence table

Inspect claims, sources and review details

Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.

One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.

0 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6
Property and statement	Original source and location	Review and provenance

No evidence rows match these filters. Choose another scope or clear the search.

How to read the evidence

Sources and history

Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked

2 source records and release history

Genome-wide prediction of disease variant effects with a deep protein language model (Brandes et al., Nature Genetics 2023) · Original source · Version of record, Nature Genetics 55, 1512-1522 (published 2023-08-10)
Brandes et al. 2023 Supplementary Table 2: full benchmark evaluations of ESM1b and all other methods · Original source · Version of record, Nature Genetics 55, 1512-1522 (published 2023-08-10)

Download this release (gzip)

Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: gfm-guides-20261014-esm1b-config-cadd-indels

areas: dna-genomes
contexts: clinical_research
method types: supervised_machine_learning
reported name: CADD
foundation model eligible: false
training overlap: The article says CADD, unlike most indel predictors, was not directly trained on ClinVar
source locator: Results 'ESM1b can predict the effects of multiresidue variants', paragraph beginning 'We compared ESM1b to other models'; Supplementary Table 2 sheet 'Table_of_results_indels' row 'CADD'
missing metadata: version: reason: unreported; note: The CADD version and score source for indels are not stated; dbNSFP holds SNV scores only

Related records

configuration of: CADD
system: CADD on all in-frame indels (Brandes et al. 2023)
system: CADD on deletions (Brandes et al. 2023)
system: CADD on deletion-insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)
system: CADD on insertions (Brandes et al. 2023)

Suggest a correction