Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21383316›Full record

ArticleGenome research2011

Recurrence, submicroscopic complexity, and potential clinical relevance of copy gains detected by array CGH that are shown to be unbalanced insertions by FISH.

Nicholas J Neill, Blake C Ballif, Allen N Lamb, Sumit Parikh, J Britt Ravnan, Roger A Schultz, Beth S Torchia, Jill A Rosenfeld, Lisa G Shaffer

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Structural variant identification and characterization.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas J NeillSignature Genomic Laboratories, Spokane, WA 99207, USA.
Blake C Ballif
Allen N Lamb
Sumit Parikh
J Britt Ravnan
Roger A Schultz
Beth S Torchia
Jill A Rosenfeld
Lisa G Shaffer
Signature Research (United States) · USCleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insertions occur when a segment of one chromosome is translocated and inserted into a new region of the same chromosome or a non-homologous chromosome. We report 71 cases with unbalanced insertions identified using array CGH and FISH in 4909 cases referred to our laboratory for array CGH and found to have copy-number abnormalities. Although the majority of insertions were non-recurrent, several recurrent unbalanced insertions were detected, including three der(Y)ins(Y;18)(q?11.2;p11.32p11.32)pat inherited from parents carrying an unbalanced insertion. The clinical significance of these recurrent rearrangements is unclear, although the small size, limited gene content, and inheritance pattern of each suggests that the phenotypic consequences may be benign. Cryptic, submicroscopic duplications were observed at or near the insertion sites in two patients, further confounding the clinical interpretation of these insertions. Using FISH, linear amplification, and array CGH, we identified a 126-kb duplicated region from 19p13.3 inserted into MECP2 at Xq28 in a patient with symptoms of Rett syndrome. Our results demonstrate that although the interpretation of most non-recurrent insertions is unclear without high-resolution insertion site characterization, the potential for an otherwise benign duplication to result in a clinically relevant outcome through the disruption of a gene necessitates the use of FISH to determine whether copy-number gains detected by array CGH represent tandem duplications or unbalanced insertions. Further follow-up testing using techniques such as linear amplification or sequencing should be used to determine gene involvement at the insertion site after FISH has identified the presence of an insertion.

Indexed as

Comparative Genomic HybridizationIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceTranslocation, GeneticBase SequenceChromosome BreakpointsChromosomes, HumanDNA Copy Number VariationsFemaleGene OrderHumansMaleMolecular Sequence DataMutagenesis, InsertionalRett SyndromeSequence Alignment

Identifiers

PMID21383316
PMCPMC3065701
OpenAlexW2127362832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.