ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2007
Heteroduplex analysis for the three common HFE variants: methodology, reliability and analysis of over 5000 requests for testing.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the analysis of over 5300 patient samples for the HFE genotype.
methodsBlood samples received from hospitals in England, Wales and Ireland were analysed with a single, multiplex PCR using heteroduplex generators for the C282Y, H63D and S65C variants of the HFE gene. PCR products labelled with fluorescent dyes were analysed by capillary electrophoresis. Genotype frequencies were analysed according to the reasons given for testing.
resultsAnalysis of 400 samples sent in duplicate revealed one error that was associated with reporting rather than the methodology. Of 5327 samples received, 1122 were for family testing, 2470 for diagnostic testing and in 1735 cases no reason was given. Overall, homozygosity for C282Y was found in 14% of samples received for family testing and in 16% of the remaining samples. Clinical indications such as "liver disease" were of little predictive value for homozygosity for C282Y, but this increased if a raised serum ferritin concentration or transferrin saturation was indicated. When the diagnosis was iron overload, 39% of subjects tested were homozygous for C282Y. Compound heterozygosity (C282Y/H63D) was more frequent than in the general population but the frequency was not further increased in subjects for whom there was a diagnosis of iron overload. The frequencies of heterozygosity for H63D or S65C and homozygosity for H63D were not significantly increased in any group compared with the general population frequency.
conclusionThese results demonstrate the reliability of the methodology and confirm the difficulty of identifying genetic haemochromatosis purely on the basis of clinical suspicion that haemochromatosis may be responsible for liver disease, diabetes or arthritis.
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.