ReviewClinical oral investigations2021
Re-focusing on Agnathia-Otocephaly complex.
Review in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- First Case Report of Agnathia-Otocephaly Complex Reported in Niger.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Newborn with Hypoglossia and Micrognathia with Situs Inversus Totalis Born to Mothers with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Case Report.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Familial severe skeletal Class II malocclusion with gingival hyperplasia caused by a complex structural rearrangement at the KCNJ2-KCNJ16 locus.HGG advances · 2024Article
- Article
- A multi-disciplinary, comprehensive approach to management of children with heterotaxy.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Review
- Advances in prenatal diagnosis of fetal otocephaly by 3D imaging.BMJ case reports · 2022Article
- A novel PRRX1 loss-of-function variation contributing to familial atrial fibrillation and congenital patent ductus arteriosus.Genetics and molecular biology · 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
16 authors at 12 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAgnathia-otocephaly complex is a rare condition characterized by mandibular hypoplasia or agnathia, ear anomalies (melotia/synotia) and microstomia with aglossia. This severe anomaly of the first branchial arch is most often lethal. The estimated incidence is less than 1 in 70.000 births, with etiologies linked to both genetic and teratogenic factors. Most of the cases are sporadic. To date, two genes have been described in humans to be involved in this condition: OTX2 and PRRX1. Nevertheless, the overall proportion of mutated cases is unknown and a significant number of patients remain without molecular diagnosis. Thus, the involvement of other genes than OTX2 and PRRX1 in the agnathia-otocephaly complex is not unlikely. Heterozygous mutations in Cnbp in mice are responsible for mandibular and eye defects mimicking the agnathia-otocephaly complex in humans and appear as a good candidate. Therefore, in this study, we aimed (i) to collect patients presenting with agnathia-otocephaly complex for screening CNBP, in parallel with OTX2 and PRRX1, to check its possible implication in the human phenotype and (ii) to compare our results with the literature data to estimate the proportion of mutated cases after genetic testing. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this work, we describe 10 patients suffering from the agnathia-otocephaly complex. All of them benefited from array-CGH and Sanger sequencing of OTX2, PRRX1 and CNBP. A complete review of the literature was made using the Pubmed database to collect all the patients described with a phenotype of agnathia-otocephaly complex during the 20 last years (1998-2019) in order (i) to study etiology (genetic causes, iatrogenic causes…) and (ii), when genetic testing was performed, to study which genes were tested and by which type of technologies.
resultsIn our 10 patients' cohort, no point mutation in the three tested genes was detected by Sanger sequencing, while array-CGH has allowed identifying a 107-kb deletion encompassing OTX2 responsible for the agnathia-otocephaly complex phenotype in 1 of them. In 4 of the 70 cases described in the literature, a toxic cause was identified and 22 out the 66 remaining cases benefited from genetic testing. Among those 22 patients, 6 were carrying mutation or deletion in the OTX2 gene and 4 in the PRRX1 gene. Thus, when compiling results from our cohort and the literature, a total of 32 patients benefited from genetic testing, with only 34% (11/32) of patients having a mutation in one of the two known genes, OTX2 or PRRX1.
conclusionsFrom our work and the literature review, only mutations in OTX2 and PRRX1 have been found to date in patients, explaining around one third of the etiologies after genetic testing. Thus, agnathia-otocephaly complex remains unexplained in the majority of the patients, which indicates that other factors might be involved. Although involved in first branchial arch defects, no mutation in the CNBP gene was found in this study. This suggests that mutations in CNBP might not be involved in such phenotype in humans or that, unlike in mice, a compensatory effect might exist in humans. Nevertheless, given that agnathia-otocephaly complex is a rare phenotype, more patients have to be screened for CNBP mutations before we definitively conclude about its potential implication. Therefore, this work presents the current state of knowledge on agnathia-otocephaly complex and underlines the need to expand further the understanding of the genetic bases of this disorder, which remains largely unknown. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We made here an update and focus on the clinical and genetic aspects of agnathia-otocephaly complex as well as a more general review of craniofacial development.
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.