Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29692413›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2018

Structural variation in the 3D genome.

Malte Spielmann, Darío G Lupiáñez, Stefan Mundlos

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 422 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
422citing 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

422 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Haplotype-Resolved 3D Genomic Landscapes and Their Impacts on Agronomic Traits in Grapevine.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Cis-regulatory editing of SD1 promoter enhances TCP19-mediated repression to optimize plant height in Kam sweet rice.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026
    Article

362 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Malte SpielmannDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0583-4683
Darío G LupiáñezEpigenetics and Sex Development Group, Berlin Institute for Medical Systems Biology, Max-Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin-Buch, Germany.
Stefan MundlosMax Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, RG Development & Disease, Berlin, Germany. mundlos@molgen.mpg.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9788-3166

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Structural and quantitative chromosomal rearrangements, collectively referred to as structural variation (SV), contribute to a large extent to the genetic diversity of the human genome and thus are of high relevance for cancer genetics, rare diseases and evolutionary genetics. Recent studies have shown that SVs can not only affect gene dosage but also modulate basic mechanisms of gene regulation. SVs can alter the copy number of regulatory elements or modify the 3D genome by disrupting higher-order chromatin organization such as topologically associating domains. As a result of these position effects, SVs can influence the expression of genes distant from the SV breakpoints, thereby causing disease. The impact of SVs on the 3D genome and on gene expression regulation has to be considered when interpreting the pathogenic potential of these variant types.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsGene DosageChromatinGene Expression RegulationGenome, HumanHumansChromatin

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.