Recalculated CNV penetrance: what it does and does not change for counselling

Goh et al. recently reported that most recurrent copy number variants (CNVs) are far less penetrant for intellectual disability (ID) than previously estimated, and recommended that fourteen should no longer be reported. We show that the lower estimates arise mainly from assuming the population prevalence of ID alone, while case counts derive from broad diagnostic referral cohorts in which about half of individuals were referred for other indications. The proposed formula estimates a risk difference rather than penetrance, and cases and controls were selected, assayed and phenotyped differently

This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice. It is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement, treatment, or program — especially if you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or managing a health condition.