MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2796952935 · doi:10.1101/300905

Deleterious genetic variants in <i>NOTCH1</i> are a major contributor to the incidence of non-syndromic Tetralogy of Fallot

2018· preprint· en· W2796952935 on OpenAlexaff
Donna J. Page, Matthieu J. Miossec, Simon G. Williams, Elisavet Fotiou, Richard M. Monaghan, Heather J. Cordell, Louise Sutcliffe, Ana Töpf, Mathieu Bourgey, Guillaume Bourque, Robert Eveleigh, Sally L. Dunwoodie, David S. Winlaw, Shoumo Bhattacharya, Jeroen Breckpot, Koenraad Devriendt, Marc Gewillig, J. David Brook, Kerry Setchfield, Frances Bu’Lock, John O’Sullivan, Graham Stuart, Connie R. Bezzina, Barbara J.M. Mulder, Alex V. Postma, James R. Bentham, Martín Baron, Sanjeev S. Bhaskar, Graeme C. Black, William G. Newman, Kathryn E. Hentges, Mark Lathrop, Mauro Santibanez‐Koref, Bernard Keavney

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsMcGill Genome CentreOntario Genomics
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsExome sequencingTetralogy of FallotGeneticsFrameshift mutationSanger sequencingCandidate geneMissense mutationExomeMinor allele frequencyBiologyMedicineAlleleGeneBioinformaticsMutationInternal medicineAllele frequencyHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Familial recurrence studies provide strong evidence for a genetic component to the predisposition to sporadic, non-syndromic Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), the most common cyanotic congenital heart disease (CHD) phenotype. Rare genetic variants have been identified as important contributors to the risk of CHD, but relatively small numbers of TOF cases have been studied to date. Here, we use whole exome sequencing to assess the prevalence of rare, potentially deleterious variants in candidate genes previously associated with both syndromic and non-syndromic TOF, in the largest cohort of non-syndromic TOF patients reported to date. Methods & Results 829 non-syndromic TOF patients underwent whole exome sequencing. A systematic review of the literature was conducted which revealed 77 genes in which mutations had been reported in patients with TOF. The presence of rare, deleterious variants in the 77 candidate genes was determined, defined by a minor allele frequency of ≤ 0.001 and scaled combined annotation-dependent depletion (CADD) score of ≥ 20. We found a clustering of heterozygous rare, deleterious variants in NOTCH1 (P=1.89E-15), DOCK6 (P=2.93E-07), MYOM2 (P= 7.35E-05), TTC37 (P=0.016), MESP1 (P=0.024) and TBX1 (P=0.039), after correcting for multiple testing. NOTCH1 was most frequently found to harbour deleterious variants. Changes were observed in 49 patients (6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.5% - 7.8%) and included six truncating/frameshift variants and forty missense variants. Sanger sequencing of the unaffected parents of thirteen cases identified five de novo variants. Variants were not confined to a single functional domain of the NOTCH1 protein but significant clustering of variants was evident in the EGF-like repeats (P=0.018). Three NOTCH1 missense variants (p.G200R, p.C607Y and de novo p.N1875S) were subjected to functional evaluation and showed a reduction in Jagged1 ligand-induced NOTCH signalling. p.C607Y, which exhibited the most significant reduction in signalling, also perturbed S1 cleavage of the NOTCH1 receptor in the Golgi. Conclusion The NOTCH1 locus is a frequent site of genetic variants predisposing to non-syndromic TOF with 6% of patients exhibiting rare, deleterious variants. Our data supports the polygenic origin of TOF and suggests larger studies may identify additional loci.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicCongenital heart defects research→French-language works237,207→