Whole genome sequencing identifies high-impact variants in well-known pharmacogenomic genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract More than 1,100 genetic loci have been correlated with drug response outcomes but disproportionately few have been translated into clinical practice. One explanation for the low rate of clinical implementation is that the majority of associated variants may be in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with the causal variants, which are often elusive. This study aims to identify and characterize likely causal variants within well-established pharmacogenomic genes using next-generation sequencing data from the 1000 Genomes Project. We identified 69,319 genetic variations within 160 pharmacogenomic genes, of which 8,207 variants are in strong LD (r 2 > 0.8) with known pharmacogenomic variants. Of the latter, 8 are coding or structural variants predicted to have high-impact, with 19 additional missense variants that are predicted to have moderate-impact. In conclusion, we identified putatively functional variants within known pharmacogenomics loci that could account for the association signals and represent the missing causative variants underlying drug response phenotypes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".