ArticleJIMD reports2015
Characterization of variegate porphyria mutations using a minigene approach.
Article in JIMD reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of a novel pathogenic variant in theMolecular genetics and metabolism reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porphyrias are a group of metabolic diseases that affect the skin and/or nervous system. In 2008, three unrelated patients were diagnosed with variegate porphyria at the CIPYP (Centro de Investigaciones sobre Porfirinas y Porfirias). Sequencing of the protoporphyrinogen oxidase gene, the gene altered in this type of porphyria, revealed three previously undescribed mutations: c.338+3insT, c.807G>A, and c.808-1G>C. As these mutations do not affect the protein sequence, we hypothesized that they might be splicing mutations. RT-PCRs performed on the patient's mRNAs showed normal mRNA or no amplification at all. This result indicated that the aberrant spliced transcript is possibly being degraded. In order to establish whether they were responsible or not for the patient's disease by causing aberrant splicing, we utilized a minigene approach. We found that the three mutations lead to exon skipping; therefore, the abnormal mRNAs are most likely degraded by a mechanism such as nonsense-mediated decay. In conclusion, these mutations are responsible for the disease because they alter the normal splicing pathway, thus providing a functional explanation for the appearance of disease and highlighting the use of minigene assays to complement transcript analysis.
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.