MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537709583 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.37669

Intragenic CNVs for epigenetic regulatory genes in intellectual disability: Survey identifies pathogenic and benign single exon changes

2016· article· en· W2537709583 on OpenAlexafffund
Farah Zahir, Tracy Tucker, Sonia Mayo, Carolyn J. Brown, Emilia L. Lim, Jonathan Taylor, Marco A. Marra, Fadi F. Hamdan, Jacques L. Michaud, Jan M. Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpigeneticsGeneticsCopy-number variationExonBiologyGeneIntellectual disabilityContext (archaeology)PhenotypeGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The disruption of genes involved in epigenetic regulation is well known to cause Intellectual Disability (ID). We reported a custom microarray study that interrogated among others, the epigenetic regulatory gene-class, at single exon resolution. Here we elaborate on identified intragenic CNVs involving epigenetic regulatory genes; specifically discussing those in three genes previously unreported in ID etiology-ARID2, KDM3A, and ARID4B. The changes in ARID2 and KDM3A are likely pathogenic while the ARID4B variant is uncertain. Previously, we found a CNV involving only exon 6 of the JARID2 gene occurred apparently de novo in seven patients. JARID2 is known to cause ID and other neurodevelopmental conditions. However, exon 6 of this gene encodes one of a series of repeated motifs. We therefore, investigated the impact of this variant in two cohorts and present a genotype-phenotype assessment. We find the JARID2 exon 6 CNV is benign, with a high population frequency (>14%), but nevertheless could have a contributory effect. We also present results from an interrogation of the exomes of 2,044 patients with neurocognitive phenotypes for the incidence of potentially damaging mutation in the epigenetic regulatory gene-class. This paper provides a survey of the fine-scale CNV landscape for epigenetic regulatory genes in the context of ID, describing likely pathogenic as well as benign single exon imbalances. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207