Molecular and clinical characterization of de novo and familial cases with microduplication 3q29: guidelines for copy number variation case reporting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microdeletions of 3q29 have previously been reported, but the postulated reciprocal microduplication has only recently been observed. Here, cases from four families, two ascertained in Toronto (Canada) and one each from Edinburgh (UK) and Leiden (Netherlands), carrying microduplications of 3q29 are presented. These families have been characterized by cytogenetic and molecular techniques, and all individuals have been further characterized with genome-wide, high density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays run at a single centre (The Centre for Applied Genomics, Toronto). In addition to polymorphic copy-number variants (CNV), all carry duplications of 3q29 ranging in size from 1.9 to 2.4 Mb, encompassing multiple genes and defining a minimum region of overlap of about 1.6 Mb bounded by clusters of segmental duplications that is remarkably similar in location to previously reported 3q29 microdeletions. Consistent with other reports, the phenotype is variable, although developmental delay and significant ophthalmological findings were recurrent, suggesting that dosage sensitivity of genes located within 3q29 is important for eye and CNS development. We also consider CNVs found elsewhere in the genome for their contribution to the phenotype. We conclude by providing preliminary guidelines for management and anticipatory care of families with this microduplication, thereby establishing a standard for CNV reporting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".