Gonadal mosaicism of large terminal de novo duplication and deletion in siblings with variable intellectual disability phenotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intellectual disability (ID) is a complex condition that can impact multiple domains of development. The genetic contribution to ID's etiology is significant, with more than 100 implicated genes and loci currently identified. The majority of such variants are rare and de novo genetic mutations. METHODS: We have applied whole-genome microarray to identify large, rare, clinically relevant copy number variants (CNVs). We have applied well-established algorithms for variants call. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was applied to validate the variants using three technical replicates for each family member. To assess whether the copy number variation was due to balanced translocation or mosaicism, we further conducted droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) on the whole family. We have, as well, applied "critical-exon" mapping, human developmental brain transcriptome, and a database of known associated neurodevelopmental disorder variants to identify candidate genes. RESULTS: Here we present two siblings who are both impacted by a large terminal duplication and a deletion. Whole-genome microarray revealed an 18.82 megabase (MB) duplication at terminal locus (7q34-q36.3) of chromosome 7 and a 3.90 MB deletion impacting the terminal locus (15q26.3) of chromosome 15. qPCR and ddPCR experiments confirmed the de novo origin of the variants and the co-occurrence of these two de novo events among the siblings, but their absence in both parents, implicates an unbalanced translocation that could have mal-segregated among the siblings or a possible germline mosaicism. These terminal events impact IGF1R, CNTNAP2, and DPP6, shown to be strongly associated with neurodevelopmental disorders. Detailed clinical examination of the siblings revealed the presence of both shared and distinct phenotypic features. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified two large rare terminal de novo events impacting two siblings. Further phenotypic investigation highlights that even in the presence of identical large high penetrant variants, spectrum of clinical features can be different between the siblings.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".