Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30645660›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2019

[Exome diagnostics in neurology].

Michael Zech, Matias Wagner, Barbara Schormair, Konrad Oexle, Juliane Winkelmann

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Michael ZechInstitut für Neurogenomik, Helmholtz Zentrum München, München, Deutschland. michael.zech@mri.tum.de.
Matias WagnerInstitut für Neurogenomik, Helmholtz Zentrum München, München, Deutschland.
Barbara SchormairInstitut für Neurogenomik, Helmholtz Zentrum München, München, Deutschland.
Konrad OexleInstitut für Neurogenomik, Helmholtz Zentrum München, München, Deutschland.
Juliane WinkelmannInstitut für Neurogenomik, Helmholtz Zentrum München, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After an impressively successful application as a research instrument, whole-exome sequencing (WES) now enters the clinical practice due to its high diagnostic, time, and economic efficiency. WES is the diagnostic method of choice for symptoms that may be due to many different monogenic causes. Neurological indications include movement disorders, especially in cases of early symptom onset, familial clustering and complex manifestation. Starting from a blood sample, enrichment and sequencing of the exome enable the examination of all coding DNA regions for point mutations and small insertions/deletions. The identification of variants as the cause of a disease requires a professional evaluation pipeline, variant prioritization schemes and variant classification databases. Whereas many variants can be reliably classified as pathogenic or benign, variants of unclear significance (VUS) remain a challenge for the clinical evaluation and necessitate a periodic reanalysis of WES data. As a genetic examination WES requires adequate patient informed consent which in particular should address possible secondary findings as well as data security. A positive molecular result ends diagnostic odysseys, enables accurate genetic counseling and can point to targeted preventive measures and treatment. A WES significantly contributes to the understanding of the genetic architecture and pathophysiology of neurological diseases, enriching and enabling precision medicine.

Indexed as

ExomeGenetic TestingNervous System DiseasesNeurologyExome SequencingHumansExome sequencingGenetic heterogeneityPrecision medicineVariant classificationVariant identification

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.