Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25120560›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2014

The role of AGG interruptions in fragile X repeat expansions: a twenty-year perspective.

Gary J Latham, Justine Coppinger, Andrew G Hadd, Sarah L Nolin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. G-Quadruplexes in Repeat Expansion Disorders.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Laboratory testing for fragile X, 2021 revision: a technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Surveillance and prevalence of fragile X syndrome in Indonesia.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2021
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Gary J LathamAsuragen Inc., Austin, TX, USA.
Justine CoppingerAsuragen Inc., Austin, TX, USA.
Andrew G HaddAsuragen Inc., Austin, TX, USA.
Sarah L NolinDepartment of Human Genetics, New York State Institute for Basic Research in Developmental Disabilities Staten Island, NY, USA.

Funding

Technologies for Mapping Interspersed AGG Sequences in the FMR1 GeneR44HD066953 · NICHD · ASURAGEN, INC. · PI CHEN, LIANGJING CHEN · 2011 to 2012
$1.3M
NICHD NIH HHS R44 HD066953
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 1994, it was suggested that AGG interruptions affect the stability of the fragile X triplet repeat. Until recently, however, this hypothesis was not explored on a large scale due primarily to the technical difficulty of determining AGG interruption patterns of the two alleles in females. The recent development of a PCR technology that overcomes this difficulty and accurately identifies the number and position of AGGs has led to several studies that examine their influence on repeat stability. Here, we present a historical perspective of relevant studies published during the last 20 years on AGG interruptions and examine those recent publications that have refined risk estimates for repeat instability and full-mutation expansions.

Indexed as

autism spectrum disordersdiagnostic testsFMR1fragile X syndromerepeat expansion diseasesrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID25120560
PMCPMC4114290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.