ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2025
ClinGen recuration of hearing loss-associated genes demonstrates significant changes in gene-disease validity over time.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
44 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Hearing Loss Gene Curation Expert Panel was assembled in 2016 and has since curated 174 gene-disease relationships (GDRs) using ClinGen's semiquantitative framework. ClinGen mandates the timely recuration of all GDRs classified as Disputed, Limited, Moderate, and Strong every 2 to 3 years.
methodsThirty-five GDRs met the criteria for recuration within 2 years of original curation. Previous evidence was reevaluated using the latest curation guidelines, and a comprehensive literature review was performed to obtain new evidence. Recurations were approved by the Gene Curation Expert Panel and published on the ClinGen website (www.clinicalgenome.org).
resultsEight of 35 GDRs (22%) changed their classification. Two Moderate and 5 Strong GDRs were upgraded to Definitive because of new case evidence. One Strong was subsumed under another Definitive GDR after evaluation of the lumping/splitting of disease entities. Twenty-seven of 35 patients remained unchanged, with little to no new evidence reported.
conclusionGenes classified as Moderate and Strong were likely to build evidence and change their classification over time, whereas Limited were unlikely to gain evidence. These findings highlight the critical role of recuration in ensuring that genetic tests and research studies incorporate the most recent evidence into their efforts.
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.