MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415453632 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaf149.1735

OR03-03 Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) in a Large Prospective Cohort of Idiopathic Short Stature (ISS): New Genes Implicated in the ISS Phenotype

2025· article· en· W4415453632 on OpenAlexaff
Laurana de Polli Cellin, Nathalia Liberatoscioli Menezes De Andrade, Alexsandra C. Malaquias, Raíssa Rezende, Patricia Volpon Santos Atique, Camila Luz, Gabriela A. Vasques, Vinícius Castro Souza, Elisangela P S Quedas, Paulo Ferrez Collett‐Solberg, Sonir Roberto Rauber Antonini, Carlos Alberto Longui, Renata Da Cunha Scalco, Alexander A.L. Jorge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShort statureExome sequencingIdiopathic short staturePhenotypePTPN11GeneExomeProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Disclosure: L.D. Cellin: None. N.L. Andrade: None. A.C. Malaquias: None. R.C. Rezende: None. G.J. Kim: None. P.V. Atique: None. C.C. Luz: None. G.A. Vasques: None. V. Souza: None. E. Quedas: None. P.F. Collett-Solberg: None. S.R. Rauber Antonini: None. C. Longui: None. R.D. Scalco: None. A.A. Jorge: Novo Nordisk. Introduction: Most children evaluated for short stature are classified as having idiopathic short stature (ISS) due to the absence of clinical or laboratory findings that suggest a specific underlying cause. In this context, genetic testing has emerged as a valuable diagnostic tool. Objective: To assess the diagnostic yield of whole exome sequencing (WES) and identify novel genes implicated in short stature among children diagnosed with ISS. Patients and Methods: From 2021 to 2024, we prospectively enrolled 233 children with ISS (defined as normal birth weight, height SDS < -2, normal neurodevelopment, adequate nutrition, and the absence of malformations, dysmorphisms, endocrine, or chronic diseases). Genetic evaluation involved WES to analyze single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and copy number variations (CNVs). Segregation analysis was performed in family members for positive cases, and identified variants were classified according to ACMG criteria. Results: We identified 30 pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) variants, including 11 loss-of-function (LoF) mutations. These variants were categorized into three groups: 1. Genes/pathways previously associated with ISS: Growth plate-related genes [e.g., SHOX (4x), IHH (4x), FGFR3 (2x), COL2A1 (2x), FBN1, and ACAN] and the RAS-MAPK pathway [e.g., NF1, PTPN11 (2x), and BRAF]; 2. Genes associated with skeletal dysplasia: Variants potentially explaining a milder phenotype [e.g., LTBP3 (2x), PTHLH, ERF, POLR1A, and RPL13]; 3. Genes linked to complex growth disorders: [e.g., CSNK2A1 (2x), SPTBN1, PMM2, and ZNF292], including one variant in THRA. All variants were heterozygous except one case in PMM2, which was compound heterozygous. Patient phenotype reassessment confirmed the absence of typical features associated with these genes. In at least 50% of cases, the genetic diagnosis influenced treatment and/or follow-up strategies. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were identified in 28 cases, with at least 4 showing evidence of pathogenicity (VUSp). Notably, three patients carried LoF variants in SMAD6, a gene not previously associated with growth disorders. Burden analysis, including comparisons with internal and public databases, and familial segregation studies suggest that SMAD6 represents a novel gene implicated in ISS. Conclusion: Our findings reveal that a significant proportion of children classified as having ISS have an identifiable monogenic cause of growth disturbance, with a diagnostic yield of 12.9% (95% CI: 8.6%–17.2%). A gene panel restricted to those traditionally associated with ISS would yield a maximum diagnostic rate of 7.3%, underscoring the advantages of hypothesis-free approaches such as WES or WGS. Furthermore, we expanded the genetic landscape of ISS by implicating SMAD6 LoF variants as a potential novel cause of this condition. Presentation: Saturday, July 12, 2025

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207