ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2020
A four-step mutation at D22S1045 in one complex paternity case when the brother of the alleged father hypothesis is evaluated.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identification of the Remains of an Adult Using DNA from Their Deciduous Teeth as a Reference Sample.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report one complex paternity case presenting a presumable paternal four-step STR mutation between the alleged father (AF) and child; the complexity of the case required the AF-brother hypothesis to be discarded without including this DNA sample. A total of 23 autosomal STR loci included in the Powerplex Fusion® and Globalfiler™ kits confirmed one isolated mismatch for D22S1045 between the AF (17/17) and the male child (13/15) in the presence of the mother (15/15). In this case, the STR structure and father's age do not seem to have contributed to promote the observed multistep mutation. The Paternity Index (PI) based on 23 autosomal STRs did not favor the AF paternity over the AF-brother hypothesis based on a flat prior (PI = 0.1217; W = 10.85%). For that reason, we included 38 autosomal human identification (HID) insertions-deletions (indels) and 20 retrotransposon insertion polymorphisms (RIPs) contained in the InnoTyper® 21 kit. Although these biallelic markers favored the AF paternity rather than the AF-brother hypothesis (LR = 110.3; W = 99.1%), the global PI based on 81 autosomal markers supported moderately the AF paternity hypothesis (LR = 13.4; W = 93.1%). The application of different mutation models showed a consistent support to the AF paternity hypothesis (PI = 93.1-99.95%), which could be useful for interpretation in these multistep STR mutation cases. In brief, we showed the impact of a four-step mutation at D22S1045 to obtain definitive paternity conclusions, particularly under a complex scenario when the AF-brother hypothesis is assessed. Forensic genomics arises as the next option for similar complex paternity cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32417977What 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.