Trial reportMolecular medicine reports2020
Disorders of sex development: Genetic characterization of a patient cohort.
Trial report in Molecular medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unraveling the genetic and pathophysiological mechanisms underlying disorders of sex development.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2025Review
- Article
- Digenic Origin of Difference of Sex Development in a Patient Harbouring DHX37 and MAMLD1 Variants.Case reports in pediatrics · 2024Article
- The study of a hermaphroditic sheep caused by a mutation in the promoter ofVeterinary and animal science · 2023Article
- Genomic instability in individuals with sex determination defects and germ cell cancer.Cell death discovery · 2023Article
- Comprehensive molecular analysis identifies eight novel variants in XY females with disorders of sex development.Molecular human reproduction · 2023Article
- Lessons Learned from 17 Years of Multidisciplinary Care for Differences of Sex Development Patients at a Single Indonesian Center.Sexual development : genetics, molecular biology, evolution, endocrinology, embryology, and pathology of sex determination and differentiation · 2023Article
- Case Report: Severe Gonadal Dysgenesis Causing 46,XY Disorder of Sex Development Due to a NovelFrontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Molecular and Cytogenetic Analysis of Romanian Patients with Differences in Sex Development.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A fish with no sex: gonadal and adrenal functions partition between zebrafish NR5A1 co-orthologs.Genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disorders of sex development (DSDs) are congenital conditions in which the external appearance of the individual does not coincide with the chromosomal constitution or the gonadal sex. In other words, there is an ambiguous or intermediate condition between the male and female phenotypes of the anatomical sex. These atypical conditions are manifested in several ways, ranging from genital ambiguity to phenotypes that are so attenuated that they can go unnoticed or appear normal. Currently, there is a lack of understanding of the factors responsible for these outcomes; however, they are likely to be conditioned by genetic, hormonal and environmental factors during prenatal and postnatal development. The present study determined the genetic etiology of DSDs in Colombian patients by conventional cytogenetic analysis, FISH and MLPA (for SF1, DAX1, SOX9, SRY and WNT4). A cohort of 43 patients with clinical phenotypes of sex development disorder was used in the present study. Using this multistep experimental approach, a diagnostic percentage of 25.58% was obtained: 17 patients (39.53%) were classified as having gonadal development disorders, the majority of which were ovotesticular disorders with numerical and/or structural alterations of the sex chromosomes, 9 patients (20.93%) were classified as having testicular DSD with a 46,XY karyotype, and 3 patients (6.98%) as having ovarian DSD with a 46,XX karyotype. The remaining 14 patients (32.56%) were classified as 'other' since they could not be grouped into a specific class of gonadal development, corresponding to hypospadias and multiple congenital anomalies. These findings highlight the importance of histological and cytogenetic studies in a gonadal biopsy. In 11/43 cases, the multistep experimental protocol presented in the present study yielded etiological or histological findings that could be used to define the medical management of patients with DSDs. In conclusion, for the etiological diagnosis of DSDs, a broad‑spectrum approach that includes endocrinological tests, conventional karyotyping, molecular karyotyping by FISH and, molecular tests is required, in addition to gonadal tissue analyses, to identify genetic alterations.
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.