Cited by 621Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Rare Diseases

Population analysis of large copy number variants and hotspots of human genetic disease

Open access
Itsara, Andy, Cooper, Gregory M., Baker, Carl, Girirajan, Santhosh, Li, Jun, Absher, Devin, Krauss, Ronald M., Myers, Richard M. +6 more·2009·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

Copy number variants (CNVs) contribute to human genetic and phenotypic diversity. However, the distribution of larger CNVs in the general population remains largely unexplored. We identify large variants in approximately 2500 individuals by using Illumina SNP data, with an emphasis on "hotspots" prone to recurrent mutations. We find variants larger than 500 kb in 5%-10% of individuals and variants greater than 1 Mb in 1%-2%. In contrast to previous studies, we find limited evidence for stratification of CNVs in geographically distinct human populations. Importantly, our sample size permits a robust distinction between truly rare and polymorphic but low-frequency copy number variation. We find that a significant fraction of individual CNVs larger than 100 kb are rare and that both gene density and size are strongly anticorrelated with allele frequency. Thus, although large CNVs commonly exist in normal individuals, which suggests that size alone can not be used as a predictor of pathogenicity, such variation is generally deleterious. Considering these observations, we combine our data with published CNVs from more than 12,000 individuals contrasting control and neurological disease collections. This analysis identifies known disease loci and highlights additional CNVs (e.g., 3q29, 16p12, and 15q25.2) for further investigation. This study provides one of the first analyses of large, rare (0.1%-1%) CNVs in the general population, with insights relevant to future analyses of genetic disease.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.12.014

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • About 0.25% of controls (n=66,462) are found with the 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 microdeletion.

    “a review of reported data from control cohorts (n = 66,462 subjects) summarized to date show that about 0.25% of controls are found with the 15q11.2 BP1–BP2 microdeletion [18,27,28,29,30,31].”

    From The 15q11.2 BP1–BP2 Microdeletion Syndrome: A Review (2015) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Discussion reports a meta-analysis of more than 12,500 samples, including two large control sets, but gives no frequency for the 15q11.2 BP1–BP2 microdeletion. Searches for that locus, 66,462 controls, and 0.25% found no passage in our copy supporting the cited estimate. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Itsara, A., Cooper, G. M., Baker, C., Girirajan, S., Li, J., Absher, D., Krauss, R. M., Myers, R. M., Ridker, P. M., Chasman, D. I., Mefford, H., Ying, P., Nickerson, D. A., & Eichler, E. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Eichler, Evan E.
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-02
Volume
84
Issue
2
Pages
148-161
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2148095347
Cited by
591
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 74
FWCI
42.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • Donald W. Reynolds Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (Z01AG000932)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL01069757)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (P01HG004120, HG004120, T32HG000035)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007266)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD043569, R01HD043569)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
copy number variation, population genetics, recurrent mutations, allele frequency, gene density, neurological disorders, disease loci, rare variants
MeSH terms
Genetics, Population, Genotype, Geography, Humans, Polymorphism, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Sequence Deletion, Gene Dosage, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Duplication, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Genetic Diseases, Inborn

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review