ArticleGenome medicine2025
Clinical applications of and molecular insights from RNA sequencing in a rare disease cohort.
Article in Genome medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-read proteogenomic atlas of human neuronal differentiation reveals isoform diversity informing neurodevelopmental risk mechanisms.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Novel deep intronic variant in CLCN1 causing autosomal recessive myotonia congenita.Neurogenetics · 2026Article
- Targeted reflex RNA sequencing for enhanced variant classification on exome and genome sequencing improves patient outcomes.NPJ genomic medicine · 2026Article
- From variants to answers: The evolution of genetic counseling in IEI.Journal of human immunity · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Yield of Comprehensive Reanalysis After Nondiagnostic Short-Read Genome Sequencing in Infants With Unexplained Epilepsy.Neurology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking RNA-seq Tools for Real-World Diagnostic Applications.Research square · 2026Article
- Benchmarking RNA-seq Tools for Real-World Diagnostic Applications.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Peripheral Blood Transcriptomic Features Distinguishing Postpartum Depression from Major Depressive Disorder and Healthy Postpartum Controls.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Long-read proteogenomic atlas of human neuronal differentiation reveals isoform diversity informing neurodevelopmental risk mechanisms.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The utility of ultra-deep RNA sequencing in Mendelian disorder diagnostics.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
34 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is emerging as a valuable tool for identifying disease-causing RNA transcript aberrations that cannot be identified by DNA-based testing alone. Previous studies demonstrated some success in utilizing RNA-seq as a first-line test for rare inborn genetic conditions. However, DNA-based testing (increasingly, whole genome sequencing) remains the standard initial testing approach in clinical practice. The indications for RNA-seq after a patient has undergone DNA-based sequencing remain poorly defined, which hinders broad implementation and funding/reimbursement.
methodsIn this study, we identified four specific and familiar clinical scenarios, and investigated in each the diagnostic utility of RNA-seq on clinically accessible tissues: (i) clarifying the impact of putative intronic or exonic splice variants (outside of the canonical splice sites), (ii) evaluating canonical splice site variants in patients with atypical phenotypes, (iii) defining the impact of an intragenic copy number variation on gene expression, and (iv) assessing variants within regulatory elements and genic untranslated regions.
resultsThese hypothesis-driven RNA-seq analyses confirmed a molecular diagnosis and pathomechanism for 45% of participants with a candidate variant, provided supportive evidence for a DNA finding for another 21%, and allowed us to exclude a candidate DNA variant for an additional 24%. We generated evidence that supports two novel Mendelian gene-disease associations (caused by variants in PPP1R2 and MED14) and several new disease mechanisms, including the following: (1) a splice isoform switch due to a non-coding variant in NFU1, (2) complete allele skew from a transcriptional start site variant in IDUA, and (3) evidence of a germline gene fusion of MAMLD1-BEND2. In contrast, RNA-seq in individuals with suspected rare inborn genetic conditions and negative whole genome sequencing yielded only a single new potential diagnostic finding.
conclusionsIn summary, RNA-seq had high diagnostic utility as an ancillary test across specific real-world clinical scenarios. The findings also underscore the ability of RNA-seq to reveal novel disease mechanisms relevant to diagnostics and treatment.
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.