Whole Exome Sequencing of Distant Relatives in Multiplex Families Implicates Rare Variants in Candidate Genes for Oral Clefts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dozen genes/regions have been confirmed as genetic risk factors for oral clefts in human association and linkage studies, and animal models argue even more genes may be involved. Genomic sequencing studies should identify specific causal variants and may reveal additional genes as influencing risk to oral clefts, which have a complex and heterogeneous etiology. We conducted a whole exome sequencing (WES) study to search for potentially causal variants using affected relatives drawn from multiplex cleft families. Two or three affected second, third, and higher degree relatives from 55 multiplex families were sequenced. We examined rare single nucleotide variants (SNVs) shared by affected relatives in 348 recognized candidate genes. Exact probabilities that affected relatives would share these rare variants were calculated, given pedigree structures, and corrected for the number of variants tested. Five novel and potentially damaging SNVs shared by affected distant relatives were found and confirmed by Sanger sequencing. One damaging SNV in CDH1, shared by three affected second cousins from a single family, attained statistical significance (P = 0.02 after correcting for multiple tests). Family-based designs such as the one used in this WES study offer important advantages for identifying genes likely to be causing complex and heterogeneous disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".