Atypical chromosome 22q11.2 deletions are complex rearrangements and have different mechanistic origins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority (99%) of individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) have a deletion that is caused by non-allelic homologous recombination between two of four low copy repeat clusters on chromosome 22q11.2 (LCR22s). However, in a small subset of patients, atypical deletions are observed with at least one deletion breakpoint within unique sequence between the LCR22s. The position of the chromosome breakpoints and the mechanisms driving those atypical deletions remain poorly studied. Our large-scale, whole genome sequencing study of >1500 subjects with 22q11.2DS identified six unrelated individuals with atypical deletions of different types. Using a combination of whole genome sequencing data and fiber-fluorescence in situ hybridization, we mapped the rearranged alleles in these subjects. In four of them, the distal breakpoints mapped within one of the LCR22s and we found that the deletions likely occurred by replication-based mechanisms. Interestingly, in two of them, an inversion probably preceded inter-chromosomal 'allelic' homologous recombination between differently oriented LCR22-D alleles. Inversion associated allelic homologous recombination (AHR) may well be a common mechanism driving (atypical) deletions on 22q11.2.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".