ArticleNeurology. Genetics2019
Article in Neurology. Genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genotype-phenotype relationship in a cohort of 131 Chinese patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1.BMC neurology · 2026Article
- Targeted long-read sequencing for high-resolution repeat profiling in myotonic dystrophy type 1.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2026Article
- Expanding repeats, expanding impact: Somatic instability in myotonic dystrophy type 1.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026Review
- Myotonic dystrophy type 1: clinical diversity, molecular insights and therapeutic perspectives.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2025Review
- Myotonic dystrophies: an update on clinical features, molecular mechanisms, management, and gene therapy.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Review
- Muscle-specific gene editing improves molecular and phenotypic defects in a mouse model of myotonic dystrophy type 1.Clinical and translational medicine · 2025Article
- Differentiation shifts from a reversible to an irreversible heterochromatin state at the DM1 locus.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- High Resolution Analysis ofGenes · 2022Article
- Overview of the Complex Relationship between Epigenetics Markers, CTG Repeat Instability and Symptoms in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Myotonic Dystrophies: A Genetic Overview.Genes · 2022Review
- Molecular and Clinical Implications of Variant Repeats in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) clinical subtypes and CTCF site methylation status flanking the CTG expansion are mutant allele length-dependent.Human molecular genetics · 2021Article
- Epigenetics of Myotonic Dystrophies: A Minireview.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Article
- Review
- Review
- DM1 Phenotype Variability and Triplet Repeat Instability: Challenges in the Development of New Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effects of dystrophia myotonica protein kinase (
methodsPhenotypes were assessed with standardized measures. Pyrosequencing of bisulfite-treated DNA was used to quantify DNAme levels in blood from 90 patients with DM1 (adult form). Modal CTG repeat length was assessed using small-pool PCR. The presence of Acil-sensitive variant repeats was also tested.
resultsDNAme levels upstream of the CTG expansion (exon and intron 11) were correlated with modal CTG repeat length (r
conclusionsIn addition to the CTG repeat length,
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.