MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MG-129 Our experience of<i>in silico</i>gene panel testing for clinically heterogeneous disorders using exome sequencing

2015· article· en· W2416272036 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raveen Basran, Christian R. Marshall, Adam Shlien, Marianne Eliou, Jennifer Orr, Lynette Lau, Dimitri J. Stavropoulos, Peter N. Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Genetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExome sequencingSanger sequencingGeneticsExomeDNA sequencingIndelBioinformaticsComputational biologyMedicineBiologyGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismMutationGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The implementation of next generation sequencing technology (NGS) in a molecular diagnostics laboratory has resulted in a major transformation in service delivery. The ability to generate accurate sequence data from thousands of genes in a single experiment has facilitated the development of comprehensive gene panel tests for genetically heterogeneous disorders. Previous methodology of gene panel testing included Sanger sequencing, which was time-consuming, labour-intensive and costly and therefore restricted the number of genes that were included in a panel. Methods/results At The Hospital for Sick Children (Toronto, Canada), we have developed and clinically validated in silico gene panels using whole exome sequencing (WES) for several heterogeneous disorders including hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP), connective tissue and bone disorders (CT), hereditary hearing loss (HL), Noonan syndrome (NS) and autoimmune disorders (AI). Our laboratory’s current strategy of using WES has several advantages including: (1) standardised workflows that facilitate the development of additional gene panels; (2) expansion of current gene panel as new disease associations are discovered; and (3) building of an internal database of allele frequencies to aid in interpretation of variants. Through our validation studies we have shown high reproducibility and accuracy with >99% sensitivity for detection of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and >95% for detection of small insertion/deletions (indels). Conclusions NGS technologies have enabled our laboratory to expand our testing menu to include genes that comprise part of the differential diagnoses for several disorders which will lead to improved detection rates, increased genetic diagnoses and ultimately better clinical care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207