ArticleHuman genomics2025
Real-world evaluation of gnomAD variant co-occurrence information for haplotype phasing in autosomal recessive disorders.
Article in Human genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Benchmarking genetic birth prevalence estimates against newborn screening data.American journal of human genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHaplotype phasing plays an essential role in the analysis of variants associated with autosomal recessive disorders, particularly in verifying compound heterozygosity. Recently, Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD) introduced a population-based method to infer cis or trans configurations using variant co-occurrence information; however, its routine clinical utility remains unclear.
resultsA retrospective review was performed on 2,783 targeted gene panel tests conducted at Asan Medical Center, Korea, from 2017 to 2024. Through this analysis, 299 unrelated patients were identified as carrying at least two reportable variants—classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), likely pathogenic (LP), or pathogenic (P)—within the same autosomal recessive gene. In total, this resulted in the identification of 342 unique variant pairs among these patients. Of the variant pairs, 48.5% (n = 166) were represented in the overall gnomAD dataset, but only 37.1% (n = 127) appeared in the East Asian subset. Trans predictions were observed in 57.4% of VUS–VUS pairs (50 of 87), 87.5% of VUS–P/LP pairs (28 of 32), and 98.7% of P/LP–P/LP pairs (46 of 47), highlighting a strong link between variant pathogenicity and trans prediction. Although allele frequency did not differ between trans and cis predictions, increasing inter-variant distance showed a weak yet significant positive association with a trans prediction (R² = 0.041, p = 0.00927). Despite focusing on genes classically linked to autosomal-recessive disease, six pairs were predicted cis across 12 patients, including one recurrent pair in seven individuals. Several cis-predicted configurations aligned with known dominant or carrier-state phenotypes (e.g., GALC with adult-onset spastic paraparesis; GBA in Parkinson disease susceptibility), informing clinical interpretation. In a validation subset with confirmed phase (n = 27), gnomAD-based predictions were 96.3% concordant (26/27), correctly identifying all 18 trans cases and misclassifying one cis case.
conclusiongnomAD-based phasing can be used as a cost-effective method for confirming compound heterozygosity, particularly in cases where familial testing is not available, but predictions should be interpreted in clinical context. Increasing the representation of underrepresented populations in reference datasets will further enhance the clinical utility of this approach by improving both data availability and reliability.
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.