Genotype–phenotype analysis of 4q deletion syndrome: Proposal of a critical region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosome 4q deletion syndrome (4q- syndrome) is a rare condition, with an estimated incidence of 1 in 100,000. Although variable, the clinical spectrum commonly includes craniofacial, developmental, digital, skeletal, and cardiac involvement. Data on the genotype-phenotype correlation within the 4q arm are limited. We present detailed clinical and genetic information by array CGH on 20 patients with 4q deletions. We identified a patient who has a ∼465 kb deletion (186,770,069-187,234,800, hg18 coordinates) in 4q35.1 with all clinical features for 4q deletion syndrome except for developmental delay, suggesting that this is a critical region for this condition and a specific gene responsible for orofacial clefts and congenital heart defects resides in this region. Since the patients with terminal deletions all had cleft palate, our results provide further evidence that a gene associated with clefts is located on the terminal segment of 4q. By comparing and contrasting our patients' genetic information and clinical features, we found significant genotype-phenotype correlations at a single gene level linking specific phenotypes to individual genes. Based on these data, we constructed a hypothetical partial phenotype-genotype map for chromosome 4q which includes BMP3, SEC31A, MAPK10, SPARCL1, DMP1, IBSP, PKD2, GRID2, PITX2, NEUROG2, ANK2, FGF2, HAND2, and DUX4 genes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".