ReviewFrontiers in molecular biosciences2026
The "cutting edge" of non-canonical RNA splicing.
Review in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2026. 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.
- DecipheringGenes · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Splicing, including alternative splicing, is a fundamental post-transcriptional mechanism in eukaryotes that generates functional proteins and transcript diversity. Canonical splicing follows well-defined rules, such as sufficient intron and exon lengths, specific splice junction orientations, consensus dinucleotides at donor and acceptor sites, and mediation by the spliceosome. However, certain splicing events deviate from these canonical rules. This review synthesizes multiple forms of non-canonical splicing within a framework that reflects their increasing deviation from canonical mechanisms, including non-canonical splice sites, non-canonical splicing in lncRNAs, microexons, recursive splicing, trans-splicing, and spliceosome-independent splicing. In addition, this review provides a critical analysis of the current state of research for each form of non-canonical splicing and outlines key directions for future investigation. As a case study, we reanalyzed RNA-seq data from mouse neuronal cells to further examine non-canonical splice sites. These analyses show that non-canonical introns tend to be shorter and that many non-canonical junctions retain at least one canonical donor or acceptor dinucleotide, supporting the view that a substantial subset remains compatible with spliceosome-mediated recognition. Together, this review provides a structured perspective on how canonical splicing rules can be relaxed, repurposed, or bypassed across distinct biological contexts.
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.