Back

A study of sex-specific genetic effects underlying risk of orofacial clefts also highlights the potential impact of sequencing errors due to short read mis-mapping

Kanchan, K.; ERDOGAN-YILDIRIM, Z.; Berke, S. R.; Mukhopadhyay, N.; Ray, D.; Simpson, C. L.; Bidinger, J. A.; Curtis, S. W.; Butali, A.; Schwender, H.; Scott, A. F.; Bailey Wilson, J.; Beaty, T. H.; Leslie, E.; Marazita, M. L.; Ruczinski, I.

2026-07-09 dentistry and oral medicine
10.64898/2026.07.07.26357463 medRxiv
Show abstract

Orofacial clefts (OFCs), including cleft lip (CL), cleft palate (CP), and cleft lip with cleft palate (CLP), are among the most common craniofacial malformations in humans, with a birth prevalence of approximately 1 in 1,000 live births globally. Non-syndromic forms of OFC are predominantly genetic, with significant variability in prevalence across populations. Understanding the genetic underpinnings of OFCs remains a key public health priority, given the substantial medical and societal burden of these conditions. Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have implicated numerous genetic loci, but challenges remain due to genetic heterogeneity and complex gene-environment interactions. This study aimed to identify sex-specific genetic risk factors for cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P) through a meta-analysis of whole genome sequencing (WGS) data from 1,922 case-parent trios across eight diverse cohorts. Our approach revealed four SNPs in three distinct regions that showed genome-wide significant sex-specific effects. However, despite each of these SNPs passing standard quality control filters, follow-up analyses showed that these signals most likely were technical artifacts caused by sequencing errors, in particular mis-mapped reads due to sequence similarities with the sex chromosomes. These findings highlight the necessity for careful scrutiny when studying differences between the sexes in genetic association studies.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Human Molecular Genetics
141 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 3%
11.3%
3
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 12%
8.1%
4
Biology of Sex Differences
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
5
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.0%
6
Journal of Medical Genetics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
7
Human Genetics and Genomics Advances
84 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.5%
8
Journal of Dental Research
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
9
Genetic Epidemiology
55 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
10
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.5%
11
American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.2%
12
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.8%
13
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
14
Disease Models & Mechanisms
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
15
Children
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
16
Human Genetics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
17
Developmental Dynamics
56 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
18
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.2%
19
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.2%
20
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.2%
21
International Journal of Epidemiology
88 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
22
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.1%
23
Journal of Global Health
21 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
24
The American Journal of Human Genetics
234 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
25
European Journal of Human Genetics
58 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%