Systematic identification of intron retention associated variants from massive publicly available transcriptome sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many disease-associated genomic variants disrupt gene function through abnormal splicing. With the advancement of genomic medicine, identifying disease-associated splicing associated variants has become more important than ever. Most bioinformatics approaches to detect splicing associated variants require both genome and transcriptomic data. However, there are not many datasets where both of them are available. In this study, we develop a methodology to detect genomic variants that cause splicing changes (more specifically, intron retention), using transcriptome sequencing data alone. After evaluating its sensitivity and precision, we apply it to 230,988 transcriptome sequencing data from the publicly available repository and identified 27,049 intron retention associated variants (IRAVs). In addition, by exploring positional relationships with variants registered in existing disease databases, we extract 3,000 putative disease-associated IRAVs, which range from cancer drivers to variants linked with autosomal recessive disorders. The in-silico screening framework demonstrates the possibility of near-automatically acquiring medical knowledge, making the most of massively accumulated publicly available sequencing data. Collections of IRAVs identified in this study are available through IRAVDB ( https://iravdb.io/ ).
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".