ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2015
A cryptic balanced translocation (5;17), a puzzle revealed through a critical evaluation of the pedigree and a FISH focused on candidate loci suggested by the phenotype.
Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A new case of 17p13.3p13.1 microduplication resulted from unbalanced translocation: clinical and molecular cytogenetic characterization.Molecular cytogenetics · 2021Article
- Neuronal migration genes and a familial translocation t (3;17): candidate genes implicated in the phenotype.BMC medical genetics · 2020Article
- Subtelomeric Rearrangements in Patients with Recurrent Miscarriage.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report a case of a woman with a cryptic balanced translocation between chromosomes 5 and 17, suspected during genetic counseling. The woman had a history of previous fetal losses attributed to lissencephaly and intra uterine growth retardation (IUGR) and a daughter with dysmorphic features and mental retardation, previously attributed to a small deletion 5pter, detected years ago by a first generation CGH-array. This peculiar combination of personal and family history suggested the opportunity to carry out a FISH approach, focusing on chromosomes 5 and 17, based on the idea that a malsegregation secondary to a balanced translocation, might have escaped the first CGH array. This approach allowed the identification of a balanced translocation in the mother, FISH in the affected child confirmed the partial 5p deletion predicted by the previous CGH array and identified a new 17p duplication that had not been detected before. The described translocation opens the possibility of alternative imbalances that were probably responsible for previous fetal losses. The imbalances were confirmed by a new high resolution SNP array. We conclude that despite the availability of highly effective and sensitive genomic approaches a careful evaluation of medical history is highly recommended since it can suggest clinical hypothesis that can be confirmed by more classical and molecular cytogenetic based approaches.
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.