ArticleMedicine2019
A novel case of global developmental delay syndrome with microdeletion at 10p14-p15.3 and microduplication at 18p11.31-p11.32.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To characterize the etiology underlying a novel case of global developmental delay syndrome (GDDS) identified in a female child, aged 3 years old. This syndrome is a common pediatric presentation estimated to affect 3.65% of children aged 3 to 17 years.The proband's detailed family history was used to infer a likely mode of inheritance for the GDDS. Genomic DNA samples collected from the proband and her parents were evaluated using conventional karyotyping, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), comparative genomic hybridization microarray (aCGH), and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis techniques.An analysis of the proband's family history suggested that she inherited the GDDS from her father. The conducted conventional karyotyping and MLPA methods failed to identify a causative defect for the GDDS; however, the aCGH analysis revealed both a 6.6-Mb deletion at p14-p15.3 of chromosome 10 (arr[hg19]; 100,026-6,710,183), and a 6.3-Mb duplication at p11.31-p11.32 of chromosome 18 (arr[hg19]; 136,226-6,406,733) in the proband. The conducted FISH analysis subsequently determined that these mutations resulted from a balanced translocation t(10;18)(p15.3; p11.32) carried by the proband's father. Finally, a bioinformatic analysis of the proband's mutations revealed ZMYND11 as a promising candidate causative gene for this case of GDDS.The present study demonstrates that the aCGH method can be used to effectively identify the location and approximate size of microdeletions and/or microduplications, but not balanced reciprocal translocations. The nonconventional analysis methods used in the present study may be applicable to other GDDS cases with elusive etiology, and likewise, ZMYND11 should be considered as a potential causative gene during the investigation of future GDDS cases.
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.