Novel gene variants in patients with platelet‐based bleeding using combined exome sequencing and RNAseq murine expression data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Essentials Identifying genetic variants in platelet disorders is challenging due to its heterogenous nature. We combine WES, RNAseq, and python-based bioinformatics to identify novel gene variants. We find novel candidates in patient data by cross-referencing against a murine RNAseq model of thrombopoiesis. This innovative combined bioinformatic approach provides novel data for future research in the field. ABSTRACT: Background The UK Genotyping and Phenotyping of Platelets study has recruited and analyzed 129 patients with suspected heritable bleeding. Previously, 55 individuals had a definitive genetic diagnosis based on whole exome sequencing (WES) and platelet morphological and functional testing. A significant challenge in this field is defining filtering criteria to identify the most likely candidate mutations for diagnosis and further study. Objective Identify candidate gene mutations for the remaining 74 patients with platelet-based bleeding with unknown genetic cause, forming the basis of future re-recruitment and further functional testing and assessment. Methods Using python-based data frame indexing, we first identify and filter all novel and rare variants using a panel of 116 genes known to cause bleeding across the full cohort of WES data. This identified new variants not previously reported in this cohort. We then index the remaining patients, with rare or novel variants in known bleeding genes against a murine RNA sequencing dataset that models proplatelet-forming megakaryocytes. Results Filtering against known genes identified candidate variants in 59 individuals, including novel variants in several known genes. In the remaining cohort of "unknown" patients, indexing against differentially expressed genes revealed candidate gene variants in several novel unreported genes, focusing on 14 patients with a severe clinical presentation. Conclusions We identified candidate mutations in a cohort of patients with no previous genetic diagnosis. This work involves innovative coupling of RNA sequencing and WES to identify candidate variants forming the basis of future study in a significant number of undiagnosed patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".