A validated heart-specific model for splice-disrupting variants in childhood heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common congenital anomaly. Non-canonical splice-disrupting variants are not routinely evaluated by clinical tests. Algorithms including SpliceAI predict such variants, but are not specific to cardiac-expressed genes. Whole genome (WGS) (n=1083) and myocardial RNA-Sequencing (RNA-Seq) (n=114) of CHD cases was used to identify splice-disrupting variants. Using features of variants confirmed to affect splicing in myocardial RNA, we trained a machine learning model that outperformed SpliceAI for predicting cardiac-specific splice-disrupting variants (AUC 0.92 vs 0.66), and was independently validated in 43 cardiomyopathy probands (AUC 0.88 vs 0.64). Application of this model to 971 CHD WGS samples identified 9% patients with splice-disrupting variants in CHD genes. Forty-one% of predicted splice-disrupting variants were deeply intronic. The burden of variants in CHD genes was higher in cases compared with 2,570 controls. Our model improved genetic yield by identifying splice-disrupting variants that are not evaluated by routine tests.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".