Integrating RNA-Seq into genome sequencing workflow enhances the analysis of structural variants causing neurodevelopmental disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) is mainly based on exome sequencing (ES), with a diagnostic yield of 31% for isolated and 53% for syndromic NDD. As sequencing costs decrease, genome sequencing (GS) is gradually replacing ES for genome-wide molecular testing. As many variants detected by GS only are in deep intronic or non-coding regions, the interpretation of their impact may be difficult. Here, we showed that integrating RNA-Seq into the GS workflow can enhance the analysis of the molecular causes of NDD, especially structural variants (SVs), by providing valuable complementary information such as aberrant splicing, aberrant expression and monoallelic expression. METHODS: We performed trio-GS on a cohort of 33 individuals with NDD for whom ES was inconclusive. RNA-Seq on skin fibroblasts was then performed in nine individuals for whom GS was inconclusive and optical genome mapping (OGM) was performed in two individuals with an SV of unknown significance. RESULTS: We identified pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in 16 individuals (48%) and six variants of uncertain significance. RNA-Seq contributed to the interpretation in three individuals, and OGM helped to characterise two SVs. CONCLUSION: Our study confirmed that GS significantly improves the diagnostic performance of NDDs. However, most variants detectable by GS alone are structural or located in non-coding regions, which can pose challenges for interpretation. Integration of RNA-Seq data overcame this limitation by confirming the impact of variants at the transcriptional or regulatory level. This result paves the way for new routinely applicable diagnostic protocols.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".