Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37891200›Full record

ArticleNature communications2023

Systematic analysis of paralogous regions in 41,755 exomes uncovers clinically relevant variation.

Wouter Steyaert, Lonneke Haer-Wigman, Rolph Pfundt, Debby Hellebrekers, Marloes Steehouwer, Juliet Hampstead, Elke de Boer, Alexander Stegmann, Helger Yntema, Erik-Jan Kamsteeg and 3 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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Diagnosing missed cases of spinal muscular atrophy in genome, exome, and panel sequencing data sets.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

13 authors.

Wouter SteyaertDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Lonneke Haer-WigmanDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Rolph PfundtDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Debby HellebrekersMaastricht University Medical Center + , Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Marloes SteehouwerDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Juliet HampsteadDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Elke de BoerDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7022-577X
Alexander StegmannMaastricht University Medical Center + , Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9736-7137
Helger YntemaDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3877-6328
Erik-Jan KamsteegDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6480-1892
Han BrunnerDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Alexander HoischenDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8072-4476
Christian GilissenDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. christian.gilissen@radboudumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-1693-9699

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The short lengths of short-read sequencing reads challenge the analysis of paralogous genomic regions in exome and genome sequencing data. Most genetic variants within these homologous regions therefore remain unidentified in standard analyses. Here, we present a method (Chameleolyser) that accurately identifies single nucleotide variants and small insertions/deletions (SNVs/Indels), copy number variants and ectopic gene conversion events in duplicated genomic regions using whole-exome sequencing data. Application to a cohort of 41,755 exome samples yields 20,432 rare homozygous deletions and 2,529,791 rare SNVs/Indels, of which we show that 338,084 are due to gene conversion events. None of the SNVs/Indels are detectable using regular analysis techniques. Validation by high-fidelity long-read sequencing in 20 samples confirms >88% of called variants. Focusing on variation in known disease genes leads to a direct molecular diagnosis in 25 previously undiagnosed patients. Our method can readily be applied to existing exome data.

Indexed as

ExomePolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNA Copy Number VariationsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansINDEL MutationSystems Analysis

Identifiers

PMID37891200
PMCPMC10611741

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.