ArticleJournal of medical genetics1999
A highly accurate, low cost test for BRCA1 mutations.
Article in Journal of medical genetics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cancer genetics services: a systematic review of the economic evidence and issues.British journal of cancer · 2004Pooled it
- Performance of prediction models for BRCA mutation carriage in three racial/ethnic groups: findings from the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2009Trial
- Next-generation sequencing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in Moroccan prostate cancer patients with positive family history.PloS one · 2021Article
- Characterization of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants found in a Norwegian breast or ovarian cancer cohort.Familial cancer · 2017Article
- Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2010Article
- Two-dimensional DNA displays for comparisons of bacterial genomes.Biological procedures onlineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is associated with a high frequency of BRCA1 mutations. However, the widespread use of BRCA1 testing has been limited to date by three principal concerns: the fear of loss of health and life insurance, the uncertain clinical value of a positive test result, and the current lack of an inexpensive and sensitive screening test for BRCA1 mutations. We have developed an inexpensive system for gene mutational scanning, based on a combination of extensive multiplex PCR amplification and two dimensional electrophoresis. The efficiency of this system, as a screening test for BRCA1 mutations, was evaluated in a panel of 60 samples from high risk women, 14 of which contained a previously identified mutation in BRCA1. All 14 mutations were identified, as well as an additional five that had previously escaped detection. In addition to the 19 mutations, a total of 15 different polymorphic variants were scored, most of which were recurring. All were confirmed by nucleotide sequencing. The cost of screening per sample was calculated to be approximately US$70 for the manual technique used in this study, and may be reduced to approximately US$10 with the introduction of commercially available PCR robotics and fluorescent imaging. Implementation of this method of mutation screening in the research and clinical setting should permit rapid accrual of quantitative data on genotype-phenotype associations for the evaluation of diagnostic testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.