ArticleBiology2026
Reduced Detection of Human Orphan Gene Transcripts in Disease Tissue Relative to Expression- and Detection- Matched Controls.
Article in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human orphan genes are poorly annotated and lowly expressed, which makes their behavior in disease difficult to establish. We analyzed paired normal and disease RNA-seq libraries from four cohorts, quantified against a combined reference in which 2190 of 198,507 transcripts are orphan. Cohorts were first screened for library-level differences between the two conditions, and one (GSE40419, lung adenocarcinoma) was excluded because sequencing depth, pseudoalignment rate, and submission provenance all differed by condition; it is retained throughout as a calibration. In the remaining three cohorts, comprising 151 matched pairs from psoriasis, laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma, we measured the change in the fraction of transcripts with zero abundance, a quantity that does not depend on any transformation of expression. Orphan transcripts lose detection relative to non-orphan transcripts matched on abundance and on cross-patient detection frequency, by +0.0250±0.0178, +0.0553±0.0073, and +0.0659±0.0122 once the global shift in detection is held fixed. The three estimates are homogeneous (p=0.163) and pool to +0.0544±0.0059, whereas the same analysis applied to the excluded cohort returns thirteen times that value. We report the result at the level at which it is measured, and withdraw the patient-level and cohort-specific claims made in the first preprint version of this work.
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.