Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37644014›Full record

ArticleNature communications2023

Diagnostic implications of pitfalls in causal variant identification based on 4577 molecularly characterized families.

Lama AlAbdi, Sateesh Maddirevula, Hanan E Shamseldin, Ebtissal Khouj, Rana Helaby, Halima Hamid, Aisha Almulhim, Mais O Hashem, Firdous Abdulwahab, Omar Abouyousef and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Determinants of DNA-sequence-based Diagnostic Yield in the CSER Consortium.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. A perspective: PLA2G4A as drug target for vascular inflammation in Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Candidate Genes for Non-Syndromic Pediatric Cataracts.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Lama AlAbdiDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Sateesh MaddirevulaDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Hanan E ShamseldinDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ebtissal KhoujDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Rana HelabyDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Halima HamidDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4572-4569
Aisha AlmulhimDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mais O HashemDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Firdous AbdulwahabDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Omar AbouyousefDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mashael AlqahtaniDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Norah AltuwaijriDepartment of Clinical Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Amal JaafarDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Tarfa AlshidiDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Fatema AlzahraniDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mendeliome Group
Fowzan S AlkurayaDepartment of Translational Genomics, Center for Genomic Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. falkuraya@kfshrc.edu.sa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4158-341X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite large sequencing and data sharing efforts, previously characterized pathogenic variants only account for a fraction of Mendelian disease patients, which highlights the need for accurate identification and interpretation of novel variants. In a large Mendelian cohort of 4577 molecularly characterized families, numerous scenarios in which variant identification and interpretation can be challenging are encountered. We describe categories of challenges that cover the phenotype (e.g. novel allelic disorders), pedigree structure (e.g. imprinting disorders masquerading as autosomal recessive phenotypes), positional mapping (e.g. double recombination events abrogating candidate autozygous intervals), gene (e.g. novel gene-disease assertion) and variant (e.g. complex compound inheritance). Overall, we estimate a probability of 34.3% for encountering at least one of these challenges. Importantly, our data show that by only addressing non-sequencing-based challenges, around 71% increase in the diagnostic yield can be expected. Indeed, by applying these lessons to a cohort of 314 cases with negative clinical exome or genome reports, we could identify the likely causal variant in 54.5%. Our work highlights the need to have a thorough approach to undiagnosed diseases by considering a wide range of challenges rather than a narrow focus on sequencing technologies. It is hoped that by sharing this experience, the yield of undiagnosed disease programs globally can be improved.

Indexed as

ExomeHopeAllelesCausalityInformation Dissemination

Identifiers

PMID37644014
PMCPMC10465531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.