ArticleGenetics and molecular biology2022
Clinical genomics and precision medicine.
Article in Genetics and molecular biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Proteogenomics: decoding cancer in multiple dimensions.MedScience · 2026Review
- Integrating oculomics with genomics reveals imaging biomarkers for preventive and personalized prediction of arterial aneurysms.The EPMA journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision Medicine emerges from the genomic paradigm of health and disease. For precise molecular diagnoses of genetic diseases, we must analyze the Whole Exome (WES) or the Whole Genome (WGS). By not needing exon capture, WGS is more powerful to detect single nucleotide variants and copy number variants. In healthy individuals, we can observe monogenic highly penetrant variants, which may be causally responsible for diseases, and also susceptibility variants, associated with common polygenic diseases. But there is the major problem of penetrance. Thus, there is the question of whether it is worthwhile to perform WGS in all healthy individuals as a step towards Precision Medicine. The genetic architecture of disease is consistent with the fact that they are all polygenic. Moreover, ancestry adds another layer of complexity. We are now capable of obtaining Polygenic Risk Scores for all complex diseases using only data from new generation sequencing. Yet, review of available evidence does not at present favor the idea that WGS analyses are sufficiently developed to allow reliable predictions of the risk components for monogenic and polygenic hereditary diseases in healthy individuals. Probably, it is still better for WGS to remain reserved for the diagnosis of pathogenic variants of Mendelian diseases.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.