Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29567336›Full record

ReviewTrends in genetics : TIG2018

Cis- and Trans-Modifiers of Repeat Expansions: Blending Model Systems with Human Genetics.

Ryan J McGinty, Sergei M Mirkin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in genetics : TIG, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Targeted Oligonucleotides for Treating Neurodegenerative Tandem Repeat Diseases.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2019
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

2 authors.

Ryan J McGintyDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA.
Sergei M MirkinDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA. Electronic address: sergei.mirkin@tufts.edu.

Funding

Mutations Arising During DNA RepairP01GM105473 · NIGMS · BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY · PI HABER, JAMES E · 2014 to 2018
$8.6M
REPLICATION OF SIMPLE DNA REPEATSR01GM060987 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI MIRKIN, SERGEI · 2001 to 2017
$4.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P01 GM105473NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM060987
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over 30 hereditary diseases are caused by the expansion of microsatellite repeats. The length of the expandable repeat is the main hereditary determinant of these disorders. They are also affected by numerous genomic variants that are either nearby (cis) or physically separated from (trans) the repetitive locus, which we review here. These genetic variants have largely been elucidated in model systems using gene knockouts, while a few have been directly observed as single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in patients. There is a notable disconnect between these two bodies of knowledge: knockouts poorly approximate the SNP-level variation in human populations that gives rise to medically relevant cis- and trans-modifiers, while the rarity of these diseases limits the statistical power of SNP-based analysis in humans. We propose that high-throughput SNP-based screening in model systems could become a useful approach to quickly identify and characterize modifiers of clinical relevance for patients.

Indexed as

DNA Repeat ExpansionGene Expression RegulationGene Knockout TechniquesGenome, HumanGenomicsHumansMicrosatellite RepeatsPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID29567336
PMCPMC5959756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.