Improving the prediction of the functional impact of cancer mutations by baseline tolerance transformation

High-throughput prioritization of cancer-causing mutations (drivers) is a key challenge of cancer genome projects, due to the number of somatic variants detected in tumors. One important step in this task is to assess the functional impact of tumor somatic mutations. A number of computational methods have been employed for that purpose, although most were originally developed to distinguish disease-related nonsynonymous single nucleotide variants (nsSNVs) from polymorphisms. Our new method, transformed Functional Impact score for Cancer (transFIC), improves the assessment of the functional impact of tumor nsSNVs by taking into account the baseline tolerance of genes to functional variants.

Assessing farmers' vulnerability to climate change : a case study in Karnataka, India

In the context of observed climate change impacts and their effect on agriculture and crop production, this study intends to assess the vulnerability of rural livelihoods through a study case in Karnataka, India. The social approach of climate change vulnerability in this study case includes defining and exploring factors that determine farmers’ vulnerability in four villages. Key informant interviews, farmer workshops and structured household interviews were used for data collection. To analyse the data, we adapted and applied three vulnerability indices: Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI), LVI-IPCC and the Livelihood Effect Index (LEI), and used descriptive statistical methods. The data was analysed at two scales: whole sample-level and household level. The results from applying the indices for the whole-sample level show that this community's vulnerability to climate change is moderate, whereas the household-level results show that most of the households' vulnerability is high-very high, while 15 key drivers of vulnerability were identified. Results and limitations of the study are discussed under the rural livelihoods framework, in which the indices are based, allowing a better understanding of the social behaviouraltrends, as well as an holistic and integrated view of the climate change, agriculture, and livelihoods processes shaping vulnerability. We conclude that these indices, although a straightforward method to assess vulnerability, have limitations that could account for inaccuracies and inability to be standardised for benchmarking, therefore we stress the need for further research.