Detecting rearrangements in children using subtelomeric FISH and SKY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The etiology of mental retardation (MR), often presenting as developmental delay in childhood, is unknown in approximately one-half of cases. G-banding is the standard method for investigating those suspected of having a chromosomal etiology; however, detection of structural abnormalities is limited by the size and pattern of the G-bands involved. Rearrangements involving subtelomeric regions have been shown to cause MR and this has generated interest in investigating the prevalence of these rearrangements using telomere-specific probes. In addition, because cryptic interchromosomal rearrangements may not be small or confined to chromosomal ends, spectral karyotyping (SKY) using chromosome-specific painting probes may be of value. We report here a study using these two FISH-based techniques in 50 children with idiopathic MR or developmental delay and normal GTG-banded karyotypes. Our objective was to assess the prevalence of cryptic rearrangements in this population using subtelomeric FISH and SKY. Three rearrangements were detected by subtelomeric FISH: a derivative 5 from a maternal t(5;21); a recombinant 11 from a paternal pericentric inversion; and a 2q deletion that was also present in the mother. Only the derivative 5 was detected by SKY. SKY did not detect any interstitial interchromosomal rearrangement. The prevalence of clinically significant cryptic rearrangements by subtelomeric FISH and SKY was thus 4% (95% confidence interval 0.5-13.7) and 2% (95% CI 0.05-10.7), respectively. This study supports the view that G-banding does not detect all clinically significant chromosomal abnormalities and that subtelomeric FISH and SKY can detect some of these abnormalities.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".