Molecular Landscape in Limb Anomalies: Diagnostic Yield and New Candidate Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Congenital limb anomalies remain without an etiological diagnosis in up to 65% of patients. To help close this gap, we describe the genetic diagnostic outcomes of a large cohort. Patients whose primary indication for genetic consultation was a limb anomaly were included from 2014 to 2024. Demographic, investigation, and diagnostic information were extracted, described, and compared. One hundred and thirty-two patients were included in the final cohort, with an average molecular diagnostic yield of 36%. The most common conditions were polydactyly (24%) and radial anomalies (19%). Fifty percent had syndromic features. Seven (5%) patients underwent chromosomal microarray (CMA) only, 81 (63%) CMA and a gene panel, and 43 (32%) subsequently underwent exome sequencing. Exome yielded a diagnosis in 11 (25%). We identified 25 novel mutations in known disease-causing genes, including TBX3 (3 cases) and expanded the phenotype of several loci, including BMP4 and HNRNPH2. Finally, we identified two new limb anomalies candidate loci, for which previously published mouse studies from other groups suggested roles in limb development: HOXA11 and a 2q31.1 deletion involving HOXD10 and HOXD12. This represents the second largest described limb anomalies cohort. Exome-wide sequencing associated with literature and database searches for mouse data represents an opportunity to identify novel etiologies in this group of disorders, including two candidate loci we identified.
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 | 0.000 | 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".