ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Decoding splicing variants in high-throughput sequencing: a functional validation approach integrating deep learning tools.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 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.
- Beyond the sequence.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-throughput genome and exome sequencing have uncovered numerous intronic variants in disease genes, yet predicting their impact on pre-mRNA splicing is still challenging. While deep learning tools have improved variant prioritization, their ability to detect atypical regulatory mechanisms remains unknown. We combined predictions from multiple complementary splicing prediction tools with functional RNA studies to evaluate the splicing consequences of intronic variants identified in patients with neurodegenerative diseases. Nine intronic variants with uncertain impact on splicing were selected, including six deep-intronic variants, two non-canonical splice-site variants, and one canonical splice-site variant associated with an atypical phenotype. Three variants were predicted to disrupt a donor splice site, five to create a cryptic donor splice site, and one was located close to a putative acceptor site. Transcript analysis in blood revealed splicing abnormalities in eight of the nine cases. All algorithms failed at least once: deep learning tools missed specific donor site losses or cryptic splice-site activation events, while motif-based approaches failed to predict some donor site activation or generated false-positive predictions. The only variant not directly located in a splice site was predicted to activate a deep intronic splicing enhancer. Motif-based tools suggested the creation of an SRSF2 protein-dependent enhancer. Functional studies based on minigene assays support a role for SRSF2 in promoting pseudoexon inclusion. These findings highlight the complementarity of splicing prediction tools and the need to integrate them into diagnostic pipelines, with transcript-level confirmation remaining critical for accurate pathogenicity assessment.
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.