Table 1.
Comparisona |
No. shared genes with unique LOF |
P valueb | Inference | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group 1 | Groups 2 | Observed | Expected | Observed/ expected |
||
hHLHS | mHLHS | 33 | 22 | 1.50 | 0.013 | More sharing than by chance |
CEU | mHLHS | 28 | 22 | 1.27 | 0.21 | Chance sharing |
hHLHS | 247 | 69 | 3.57 | 9.1 × 10−24 | More sharing than by chance | |
CEU | 116 | 265 | 0.44 | 4.5 × 10−16 | Less sharing in CEU than expected | |
hHLHS | CEU | 306 | 453 | 0.67 | 4.2 × 10−7 | Less sharing in CEU than HLHS |
Comparison includes 68 HLHS (hHLHS) patients, and 95 1000 genomes ethic-matched CEU subjects, and eight independently derived HLHS mutant mice (mHLHS). The HLHS patients had 1278 genes with 1736 unique LOF, while the 1000 genomes CEU subjects had 1372 genes with 1550 unique LOF. Unique LOF are seen in only a single subject in the HLHS or CEU cohort. The eight HLHS mutant mice in total had 329 mutations in 329 genes
Comparison between groups was performed with χ2 goodness of fit tests