ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2020
Identification of the novel COL5A1 c.3369_3431dup, p.(Glu1124_Gly1144dup) variant in a patient with incomplete classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: The importance of phenotype-guided genetic testing.
Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Variability of Classical Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome: A Family with RareInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- A novel deep intronic COL5A1 variant in an Ehlers-Danlos syndrome family: functional characterization by minigene assay.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Investigation of dermal collagen nanostructures in Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) patients.PloS one · 2024Article
- Ehlers-Danlos syndromes and their manifestations in the visual system.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Identification of the novel COL5A1 c.3369_3431dup, p.(Glu1124_Gly1144dup) variant in a patient with incomplete classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: The importance of phenotype-guided genetic testing.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClassical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (cEDS) is a connective tissue disorder mainly caused by heterozygous COL5A1 or COL5A2 variants encoding type V collagen and rarely by the p.(Arg312Cys) missense substitution in COL1A1 encoding type I collagen. The current EDS nosology specifies that minimal suggestive criteria are marked skin hyperextensibility plus atrophic scarring together with either generalized joint hypermobility or at least three minor criteria comprising additional cutaneous and articular signs. To reach a final diagnosis, molecular testing is required. Herein, we report on a 3-year-old female who came to our attention with an inconclusive next generation sequencing (NGS) panel comprising all cEDS-associated genes.
methodsDespite the patient did not formally fulfill the nosological criteria because the skin was only slightly hyperextensible, we made a cEDS diagnosis, mainly for the presence of typical atrophic scars. We investigated COL5A1 intragenic deletions/duplications by Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA), excluded the recessive classical-like EDS type 2 by AEBP1 Sanger analysis, and retested COL5A1 with the Sanger method.
resultsMolecular analyses revealed the novel COL5A1 c.3369_3431dup p.(Glu1124_Gly1144dup) intermediate-sized duplication with a predicted dominant negative effect that was missed both by NGS and MLPA.
conclusionsThis report highlights that some cEDS patients might not display overt skin hyperextensibility and the importance of clinical expertise to make such a diagnosis in patients with an incomplete presentation. Our results also exemplify that NGS is not a fool-proof technology and that Sanger sequencing achieves the diagnostic goal when there is a sufficiently clear phenotypic indication.
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.