Systematic assessment of the contribution of structural variants to inherited retinal diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite increasing success in determining genetic diagnosis for patients with inherited retinal diseases (IRDs), mutations in about 30% of the IRD cases remain unclear or unsettled after targeted gene panel or whole exome sequencing. In this study, we aimed to investigate the contributions of structural variants (SVs) to settling the molecular diagnosis of IRD with whole-genome sequencing (WGS). A cohort of 755 IRD patients whose pathogenic mutations remain undefined were subjected to WGS. Four SV calling algorithms including include MANTA, DELLY, LUMPY and CNVnator were used to detect SVs throughout the genome. All SVs identified by any one of these four algorithms were included for further analysis. AnnotSV was used to annotate these SVs. SVs that overlap with known IRD-associated genes were examined with sequencing coverage, junction reads and discordant read pairs. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) followed by Sanger sequencing was used to further confirm the SVs and identify the breakpoints. Segregation of the candidate pathogenic alleles with the disease was performed when possible. A total of 16 candidate pathogenic SVs were identified in 16 families, including deletions and inversions, representing 2.1% of patients with previously unsolved IRDs. Autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive and X-linked inheritance of disease-causing SVs were observed in 12 different genes. Among these, SVs in CLN3, EYS and PRPF31 were found in multiple families. Our study suggests that the contribution of SVs detected by short-read WGS is about 0.25% of our IRD patient cohort and is significantly lower than that of single nucleotide changes and small insertions and deletions.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".