Rare diseases of epigenetic origin: Challenges and opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rare diseases (RDs), more than 80% of which have a genetic origin, collectively affect approximately 350 million people worldwide. Progress in next-generation sequencing technology has both greatly accelerated the pace of discovery of novel RDs and provided more accurate means for their diagnosis. RDs that are driven by altered epigenetic regulation with an underlying genetic basis are referred to as rare diseases of epigenetic origin (RDEOs). These diseases pose unique challenges in research, as they often show complex genetic and clinical heterogeneity arising from unknown gene-disease mechanisms. Furthermore, multiple other factors, including cell type and developmental time point, can confound attempts to deconvolute the pathophysiology of these disorders. These challenges are further exacerbated by factors that contribute to epigenetic variability and the difficulty of collecting sufficient participant numbers in human studies. However, new molecular and bioinformatics techniques will provide insight into how these disorders manifest over time. This review highlights recent studies addressing these challenges with innovative solutions. Further research will elucidate the mechanisms of action underlying unique RDEOs and facilitate the discovery of treatments and diagnostic biomarkers for screening, thereby improving health trajectories and clinical outcomes of affected 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".