ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2024
Disentangling mechanisms behind the pleiotropic effects of proximal 16p11.2 BP4-5 CNVs.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of functional burden pleiotropy and gene dosage responses across human traits.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Buffering of gene dosage response curves for human complex traits.Cell genomics · 2026Article
- Copy number variants reveal divergent genetic and diagnostic cortical signatures across psychiatric disorders.Research square · 2026Article
- Article
- Inferring the Selective History of CNVs Using a Maximum Likelihood Model.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Germline copy number variants and endometrial cancer risk.Human genetics · 2024Article
- The pleiotropic spectrum of proximal 16p11.2 CNVs.American journal of human genetics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whereas 16p11.2 BP4-5 copy-number variants (CNVs) represent one of the most pleiotropic etiologies of genomic syndromes in both clinical and population cohorts, the mechanisms leading to such pleiotropy remain understudied. Identifying 73 deletion and 89 duplication carrier individuals among unrelated White British UK Biobank participants, we performed a phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) between the region's copy number and 117 complex traits and diseases, mimicking four dosage models. Forty-six phenotypes (39%) were affected by 16p11.2 BP4-5 CNVs, with the deletion-only, mirror, U-shape, and duplication-only models being the best fit for 30, 10, 4, and 2 phenotypes, respectively, aligning with the stronger deleteriousness of the deletion. Upon individually adjusting CNV effects for either body mass index (BMI), height, or educational attainment (EA), we found that sixteen testable deletion-driven associations-primarily with cardiovascular and metabolic traits-were BMI dependent, with EA playing a more subtle role and no association depending on height. Bidirectional Mendelian randomization supported that 13 out of these 16 associations were secondary consequences of the CNV's impact on BMI. For the 23 traits that remained significantly associated upon individual adjustment for mediators, matched-control analyses found that 10 phenotypes, including musculoskeletal traits, liver enzymes, fluid intelligence, platelet count, and pneumonia and acute kidney injury risk, remained associated under strict Bonferroni correction, with 10 additional nominally significant associations. These results paint a complex picture of 16p11.2 BP4-5's pleiotropic pattern that involves direct effects on multiple physiological systems and indirect co-morbidities consequential to the CNV's impact on BMI and EA, acting through trait-specific dosage mechanisms.
Indexed as
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.