ArticleBioMed research international2018
Cytogenomic Integrative Network Analysis of the Critical Region Associated with Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome.
Article in BioMed research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epilepsy in Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome: Clinical Insights from a Pediatric Cohort and a Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Distinct Epileptogenic Mechanisms Associated with Seizures in Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome.Molecular neurobiology · 2022Article
- Clinical and genetic characterization of ten Egyptian patients with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome and review of literature.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2021Review
- Contribution of Congenital Heart Disorders Associated With Copy Number Variants in Mediating Risk for Brain Developmental Disorders: Evidence From 20-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
- Alternatively Splicing Interactomes Identify Novel Isoform-Specific Partners for NSD2.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Partial Monosomy 4p and Trisomy 12q due to a t(4;12)(p16.3;q24.31) Familial Translocation in Two Cousins.Molecular syndromology · 2020Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deletions in the 4p16.3 region are associated with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS), a contiguous gene deletion syndrome involving variable size deletions. In this study, we perform a cytogenomic integrative analysis combining classical cytogenetic methods, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), and systems biology strategies, to establish the cytogenomic profile involving the 4p16.3 critical region and suggest WHS-related intracellular cell signaling cascades. The cytogenetic and clinical patient profiles were evaluated. We characterized 12 terminal deletions, one interstitial deletion, two ring chromosomes, and one classical translocation 4;8. CMA allowed delineation of the deletions, which ranged from 3.7 to 25.6 Mb with breakpoints from 4p16.3 to 4p15.33. Furthermore, the smallest region of overlapping (SRO) encompassed seven genes in a terminal region of 330 kb in the 4p16.3 region, suggesting a region of susceptibility to convulsions and microcephaly. Therefore, molecular interaction networks and topological analysis were performed to understand these WHS-related symptoms. Our results suggest that specific cell signaling pathways including dopamine receptor, NAD+ nucleosidase activity, and fibroblast growth factor-activated receptor activity are associated with the diverse pathological WHS phenotypes and their symptoms. Additionally, we identified 29 hub-bottlenecks (H-B) nodes with a major role in WHS.
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.