ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2016
PKD2 mutation in an Iranian autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease family with misleading linkage analysis data.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic analysis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease in Iranian families: a combined Sanger and next-generation sequencing study.Journal of applied genetics · 2026Article
- Genetic diagnosis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: linkage analysis versus direct mutation analysis.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common genetic renal disorder caused by mutation in 2 genes PKD1 and PKD2. Thus far, no mutation is identified in approximately 10% of ADPKD families, which can suggest further locus heterogeneity. Owing to the complexity of direct mutation detection, linkage analysis can initially identify the responsible gene in appropriate affected families. Here, we evaluated an Iranian ADPKD family apparently unlinked to both PKD1 and PKD2 genes. This is one of the pioneer studies in genetic analysis of ADPKD in Iranian population.
methodsLinkage reanalysis was performed by regenotyping of flanking microsatellite markers in 8 individuals of the ADPKD family. Direct mutation analysis was performed by Sanger sequencing.
resultsMutation analysis revealed a pathogenic mutation (c.1094+1G>A) in the PKD2 gene in the proband. Analyzing 2 healthy and 4 clinically affected members confirmed the correct segregation of the mutation within the family and also ruled out the disease in 1 suspected individual. Misinterpretation of the linkage data was due to the occurrence of 1 crossing over between the PKD2 intragenic and the nearest downstream marker (D4S2929). Homozygosity of upstream markers caused the recombination indistinguishable.
conclusionAlthough analysis of additive informative polymorphic markers can overcome the misleading haplotype data, it is limited because of the lack of other highly polymorphic microsatellite markers closer to the gene. Direct mutation screening can identify the causative mutation in the apparently unlinked pedigree; moreover, it is the only approach to achieve the confirmed diagnosis in individuals with equivocal imaging results.
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.