Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32755546›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2020

Interpretable Clinical Genomics with a Likelihood Ratio Paradigm.

Peter N Robinson, Vida Ravanmehr, Julius O B Jacobsen, Daniel Danis, Xingmin Aaron Zhang, Leigh C Carmody, Michael A Gargano, Courtney L Thaxton, UNC Biocuration Core, Guy Karlebach and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. GEN-KnowRD: Reframing AI for Rare Disease Recognition.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Peter N RobinsonThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA; Institute for Systems Genomics, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06032, USA. Electronic address: peter.robinson@jax.org.
Vida RavanmehrThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Julius O B JacobsenWilliam Harvey Research Institute, Charterhouse Square, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Daniel DanisThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Xingmin Aaron ZhangThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Leigh C CarmodyThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Michael A GarganoThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Courtney L ThaxtonDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
UNC Biocuration CoreDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Guy KarlebachThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Justin ReeseEnvironmental Genomics and Systems Biology, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Manuel HoltgreweCharité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian KöhlerCharité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Julie A McMurryOregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.
Melissa A HaendelOregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.
Damian SmedleyWilliam Harvey Research Institute, Charterhouse Square, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.

Funding

The Clinical Genome Resource – Advancing genomic medicine through biocuration and expert assessment of genes and variants at scaleU24HG009650 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI JONATHAN S BERG, Jessica Ezzell Hunter · 2021 to 2026
$30.0M
The Monarch Initiative: Linking Diseases to Model Organism ResourcesR24OD011883 · OD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HAENDEL, MELISSA A, MUNGALL, CHRISTOPHER J · 2012 to 2024
$16.0M
The Clinical Genome Resource - Expert Curation and EHR IntegrationU41HG009650 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BERG, JONATHAN S · 2017 to 2020
$13.3M
The Human Phenotype Ontology: Accelerating Computational Integration of Clinical Data for GenomicsU24HG011449 · NHGRI · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI Peter Nicholas Robinson · 2021 to 2026
$6.7M
NHGRI NIH HHS U24 HG009650NHGRI NIH HHS U24 HG011449NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG009650NIH HHS R24 OD011883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO)-based analysis has become standard for genomic diagnostics of rare diseases. Current algorithms use a variety of semantic and statistical approaches to prioritize the typically long lists of genes with candidate pathogenic variants. These algorithms do not provide robust estimates of the strength of the predictions beyond the placement in a ranked list, nor do they provide measures of how much any individual phenotypic observation has contributed to the prioritization result. However, given that the overall success rate of genomic diagnostics is only around 25%-50% or less in many cohorts, a good ranking cannot be taken to imply that the gene or disease at rank one is necessarily a good candidate. Here, we present an approach to genomic diagnostics that exploits the likelihood ratio (LR) framework to provide an estimate of (1) the posttest probability of candidate diagnoses, (2) the LR for each observed HPO phenotype, and (3) the predicted pathogenicity of observed genotypes. LIkelihood Ratio Interpretation of Clinical AbnormaLities (LIRICAL) placed the correct diagnosis within the first three ranks in 92.9% of 384 case reports comprising 262 Mendelian diseases, and the correct diagnosis had a mean posttest probability of 67.3%. Simulations show that LIRICAL is robust to many typically encountered forms of genomic and phenomic noise. In summary, LIRICAL provides accurate, clinically interpretable results for phenotype-driven genomic diagnostics.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDatabases, GeneticGenomicsAlgorithmsExomeHumansPhenotypeRare DiseasesSoftwareexome sequencinggenome sequencingHuman Phenotype Ontologyliklihood ratiophenotype-driven genomic diagnostics

Identifiers

PMID32755546
PMCPMC7477017

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.