Modest impact on risk for autism spectrum disorder of rare copy number variants at 15q11.2, specifically breakpoints 1 to 2.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proximal region of chromosome 15 is one of the genomic hotspots for copy number variants (CNVs). Among the rearrangements observed in this region, CNVs from the interval between the common breakpoints 1 and 2 (BP1 and BP2) have been reported cosegregating with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Although evidence supporting an association between BP1-BP2 CNVs and autism accumulates, the magnitude of the effect of BP1-BP2 CNVs remains elusive, posing a great challenge to recurrence-risk counseling. To gain further insight into their pathogenicity for ASD, we estimated the penetrance of the BP1-BP2 CNVs for ASD as well as their effects on ASD-related phenotypes in a well-characterized ASD sample (n = 2525 families). Transmission disequilibrium test revealed significant preferential transmission only for the duplicated chromosome in probands (20T:9NT). The penetrance of the BP1-BP2 CNVs for ASD was low, conferring additional risks of 0.3% (deletion) and 0.8% (duplication). Stepwise regression analyses suggest a greater effect of the CNVs on ASD-related phenotype in males and when maternally inherited. Taken together, the results are consistent with BP1-BP2 CNVs as risk factors for autism. However, their effect is modest, more akin to that seen for common variants. To be consistent with the current American College of Medical Genetics guidelines for interpretation of postnatal CNV, the BP1-BP2 deletion and duplication CNVs would probably best be classified as variants of uncertain significance (VOUS): they appear to have an impact on risk, but one so modest that these CNVs do not merit pathogenic status.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".