ArticlePloS one2013
Can ALS-associated C9orf72 repeat expansions be diagnosed on a blood DNA test alone?
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- De novo single-nucleotide and copy number variation in discordant monozygotic twins reveals disease-related genes.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2019Trial
- Evidence-based consensus guidelines for ALS genetic testing and counseling.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2023Article
- Expanding Clinical Spectrum ofNeurology. Genetics · 2022Review
- C9ORF72: What It Is, What It Does, and Why It Matters.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2021Review
- Somatic expansion of theNeurology. Genetics · 2019Article
- The role of de novo mutations in adult-onset neurodegenerative disorders.Acta neuropathologica · 2019Review
- Article
- Gene regulation and genetics in neurochemistry, past to future.Journal of neurochemistry · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene mutations that preferentially affect the CNS have been implicated in a number of neurological disorders. This leads to the possibility that a disease-causing mutation present only in CNS tissues could be missed if it were tested in a blood DNA sample only. The commonest mutation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is an expansion of the hexanucleotide repeats of C9orf72. To find out if CNS-specific mutations of this gene could cause some cases of ALS we looked for differences in the size of C9orf72 repeats between DNA from the CNS and from white blood cells (WBCs) of 38 sporadic ALS patients, using a repeat-primed PCR screening test. We also looked for differences in C9orf72 repeats in WBC DNA from 6 ALS-discordant and 1 ALS-concordant monozygotic twins. Abnormally expanded C9orf72 repeats were found in 13% of the ALS CNS samples, as well as in their paired WBC DNA. The 87% of ALS CNS samples with normal-sized C9orf72 repeats had the same number of repeats in paired WBC samples. All ALS-discordant twins had the same normal numbers of WBC C9orf72 repeats. Although previous work suggests some tissue mosaicism in C9orf72 repeat size is probably present, this study indicates that this is not likely to be of sufficient magnitude to result in a normal C9orf72 repeat length in blood but an abnormally expanded repeat length in the CNS. This suggests that a blood DNA test alone will usually be sufficient to make a diagnosis of C9orf72 repeat-related ALS.
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.