ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2025
Exploring gene-phenotype relationships in GRIN-related neurodevelopmental disorders.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome-scale functional mapping of the mammalian whole brain with in vivo Perturb-seq.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Translatome of dorsal striatum parvalbumin interneurons revisited: insights across diverse experimental paradigms.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The GRIN family is implicated in neurological disorders, such as global developmental delay (GDD) and epilepsy. We reviewed 31 patients with GRIN-related neurodevelopmental disorders at Seoul National University Hospital; all exhibited profound GDD, with 58.1% unable to walk independently and 74.2% unable to speak meaningful words. In a pooled analysis with the GRIN portal data ( https://grin-portal.broadinstitute.org/ ), patients with missense or in-frame variants had significantly higher rates of profound GDD (74.3% vs. 30.4%, p < 0.001) and movement disorders (69.0% vs. 41.4%, p < 0.01) than those with protein-truncating variants. Furthermore, missense or in-frame variants in the M3 and M4 helices of the transmembrane domain were significantly associated with profound GDD (M3 helix: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.79-25.76; M4 helix: aOR 3.14; 95% CI 1.39-7.09) compared to those in other domains. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed variant characterization to inform personalized treatment strategies.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.