ArticleJournal of genetics2016
Application of high resolution SNP arrays in patients with congenital oral clefts in south China.
Article in Journal of genetics, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prenatal genetic findings using karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in the first-occurrence typical orofacial clefts.Molecular biology reports · 2025Article
- Genome-wide analysis of copy-number variation in humans with cleft lip and/or cleft palate identifies COBLL1, RIC1, and ARHGEF38 as clefting genes.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Widespread diversity in the transcriptomes of functionally divergent limb tendons.The Journal of physiology · 2020Article
- Identification of genomic imbalances in oral clefts.Jornal de pediatriaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) has proven to be a powerful tool in postnatal patients with intellectual disabilities. However, the diagnostic capability of CMA in patients with congenital oral clefts remain mysterious. Here, we present our clinical experience in implementing whole-genome high-resolution SNP arrays to investigate 33 patients with syndromic and nonsyndromic oral clefts in whom standard karyotyping analyses showed normal karyotypes. We aim to identify the genomic aetiology and candidate genes in patients with congenital oral clefts. CMA revealed copy number variants (CNVs) in every patient, which ranged from 2 to 9 per sample. The size of detected CNVs varied from 100 to 3.2 Mb. In 33 patients, we identified six clinically significant CNVs. The incidence of clinically significant CNVs was 18.2% (6/33). Three of these six CNVs were detected in patients with nonsyndromic clefts, including one who presented with isolated cleft lip with cleft palate (CLP) and two with cleft palate only (CPO). The remaining three CNVs were detected in patients with syndromic clefts. However, no CNV was detected in patients with cleft lip only (CLO). The six clinically significant CNVs were as follows: 8p23.1 microduplication (198 kb); 10q22.2-q22.3 microdeletion (1766 kb); 18q12.3 microduplication (638 kb); 20p12.1 microdeletion (184 kb); 6q26 microdeletion (389 kb); and 22q11.21-q11.23 microdeletion (3163 kb). In addition, two novel candidate genes for oral clefts, KAT6B and MACROD2, were putatively identified. We also found a CNV of unknown clinical significance with a detection rate of 3.0% (1/33). Our results further support the notion that CNVs significantly contributed to the genetic aetiology of oral clefts and emphasize the efficacy of whole-genome high-resolution SNP arrays to detect novel candidate genes in patients with syndromic and nonsyndromic clefts.
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.