ArticleJournal of medical genetics2020
Genetic screening for monogenic hypertension in hypertensive individuals in a clinical setting.
Article in Journal of medical genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Cacna1d D307G Mutation on Blood Pressure and Kidney Function in Rats with Salt Loading.Kidney & blood pressure research · 2025Article
- Voltage-gated calcium channels in genetic epilepsies.Journal of neurochemistry · 2024Review
- Identification and functional characterization of compound heterozygous CYP11B1 gene mutations.Endocrine · 2024Article
- Article
- CACNA1D-Related Channelopathies: From Hypertension to Autism.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2023Review
- Monogenic forms of low-renin hypertension: clinical and molecular insights.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2022Article
- Article
- A Novel Homozygous KLHL3 Mutation as a Cause of Autosomal Recessive Pseudohypoaldosteronism Type II Diagnosed Late in Life.Nephron · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMonogenic hypertension describe a series of hypertensive syndromes that are inherited by Mendelian laws. Sometimes genetic testing is required to provide evidence for their diagnoses, precise classification and targeted treatment. This study is the first to investigate the clinical utility of a causative gene screening and the combined yield of gene product expression analyses in cases with suspected monogenic hypertension.
methodsWe performed a large-scale multi-centre clinical genetic research of 1179 expertly selected hypertensive individuals from the Chinese Han population. Targeted sequencing were performed to evaluate 37 causative genes of potential cases of monogenic hypertension. Pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants were classified using the American College of Medical Genetics guidelines. Additionally, 49 variants of unknown significance (VUS) that had relatively high pathogenicity were selected and analysed using immunoblot protein expression assays.
results21 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were identified in 33 of 1179 cases (2.80%). Gene product expression analyses showed 27 VUSs harboured by 49 individuals (4.16%) could lead to abnormally expressed protein levels. Consequently, combining genetic screening with gene product expression analyses increased the diagnostic yield from 2.80% to 6.79%. The main aetiologies established were primary aldosteronism (PA; 27, 2.29%) and pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL; 10, 0.85%).
conclusionMolecular diagnoses obtained using causative gene screening combined with gene product expression analyses initially achieved a modest diagnostic yield. Our data highlight the predominant roles of PA and PPGL. Furthermore, we provide evidence indicating the enhanced diagnostic ability of combined genetic and functional evaluation.
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.