Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38282009›Full record

ArticleHuman genetics2024

Screening copy number variations in 35 unsolved inherited retinal disease families.

Xiaozhen Liu, Hehua Dai, Genlin Li, Ruixuan Jia, Xiang Meng, Shicheng Yu, Liping Yang, Jing Hong

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaozhen Liu *Department of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China.
Hehua Dai *Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Jinan, 250014, China.
Genlin LiBeijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Lab, Beijing, 100730, China.
Ruixuan JiaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China.
Xiang MengDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China.
Shicheng YuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China.
Liping YangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China. alexlipingyang@bjmu.edu.cn.
Jing HongDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China. hongjing196401@163.com.
Peking University · CNPeking University Third Hospital · CNBeijing Tongren Hospital · CNShandong Provincial QianFoShan Hospital · CN

Funding

the Beijing Natural Science Foundation of China 19JCZDJC64000(Z)the National Natural Science Foundation of China 32241001the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81970768
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to screen Copy Number Variations (CNVs) in 35 unsolved Inherited Retinal Dystrophy (IRD) families. Initially, next generation sequencing, including a specific Hereditary Eye Disease Enrichment Panel or Whole exome sequencing, was employed to screen (likely) pathogenic Single-nucleotide Variants (SNVs) and small Insertions and Deletions (indels) for these cases. All available SNVs and indels were further validated and co-segregation analyses were performed in available family members by Sanger sequencing. If not, after excluding deep intronic variants, Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), quantitative fluorescence PCR (QF-PCR) and Sanger sequencing were employed to screen CNVs. We determined that 18 probands who had heterozygous SNVs/indels or whose parents were not consanguineous but had homozygous SNVs/indels in autosomal recessive IRDs genes had CNVs in another allele of these genes, 11 families had disease-causing hemizygous CNVs in X-linked IRD genes, 6 families had (likely) pathogenic heterozygous CNVs in PRPF31 gene. Of 35 families, 33 different CNVs in 16 IRD-associated genes were detected, with PRPF31, EYS and USH2A the most common disease-causing gene in CNVs. Twenty-six and 7 of them were deletion and duplication CNVs, respectively. Among them, 14 CNVs were first reported in this study. Our research indicates that CNVs contribute a lot to IRDs, and screening of CNVs substantially increases the diagnostic rate of IRD. Our results emphasize that MLPA and QF-PCR are ideal methods to validate CNVs, and the novel CNVs reported herein expand the mutational spectrums of IRDs.

Indexed as

Retinal DystrophiesUsher SyndromesDNA Copy Number VariationsEye ProteinsHeterozygoteHumansMutationEye ProteinsEYS protein, human

Identifiers

PMID38282009
PMCPMC10881639
OpenAlexW4391311803

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.