Defining the heterogeneity of unbalanced structural variation underlying breast cancer susceptibility by nanopore genome sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Germline structural variants (SVs) are challenging to resolve by conventional genetic testing assays. Long-read sequencing has improved the global characterization of SVs, but its sensitivity at cancer susceptibility loci has not been reported. Nanopore long-read genome sequencing was performed for nineteen individuals with pathogenic copy number alterations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and PALB2 identified by prior clinical testing. Fourteen variants, which spanned single exons to whole genes and included a tandem duplication, were accurately represented. Defining the precise breakpoints of SVs in BRCA1 and CHEK2 revealed unforeseen allelic heterogeneity and informed the mechanisms underlying the formation of recurrent deletions. Integrating read-based and statistical phasing further helped define extended haplotypes associated with founder alleles. Long-read sequencing is a sensitive method for characterizing private, recurrent and founder SVs underlying breast cancer susceptibility. Our findings demonstrate the potential for nanopore sequencing as a powerful genetic testing assay in the hereditary cancer setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".