LipidSeq: a next-generation clinical resequencing panel for monogenic dyslipidemias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the design of a targeted resequencing panel for monogenic dyslipidemias, LipidSeq, for the purpose of replacing Sanger sequencing in the clinical detection of dyslipidemia-causing variants. We also evaluate the performance of the LipidSeq approach versus Sanger sequencing in 84 patients with a range of phenotypes including extreme blood lipid concentrations as well as additional dyslipidemias and related metabolic disorders. The panel performs well, with high concordance (95.2%) in samples with known mutations based on Sanger sequencing and a high detection rate (57.9%) of mutations likely to be causative for disease in samples not previously sequenced. Clinical implementation of LipidSeq has the potential to aid in the molecular diagnosis of patients with monogenic dyslipidemias with a high degree of speed and accuracy and at lower cost than either Sanger sequencing or whole exome sequencing. Furthermore, LipidSeq will help to provide a more focused picture of monogenic and polygenic contributors that underlie dyslipidemia while excluding the discovery of incidental pathogenic clinically actionable variants in nonmetabolism-related genes, such as oncogenes, that would otherwise be identified by a whole exome approach, thus minimizing potential ethical issues.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".