ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2020
Molecular analysis of 76 Chinese hemophilia B pedigrees and the identification of 10 novel mutations.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification of NovelJournal of blood medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnosis, treatment, and research status of rare diseases related to birth defects.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2023Review
- Molecular pathogenesis of a novel Met394Thr variant causing hemophilia B.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2023Article
- The Molecular Basis of FIX Deficiency in Hemophilia B.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Mutation analysis and characterisation ofBlood research · 2021Article
- Molecular analysis of 76 Chinese hemophilia B pedigrees and the identification of 10 novel mutations.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
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemophilia B (HB) is an X-linked recessive inherited bleeding disorder caused by mutations in the F9 gene that lead to plasma factor IX deficiency. To identify the causative mutations in HB, a molecular analysis of HB pedigrees in China was performed.
methodsUsing next-generation sequencing (NGS) and an in-house bioinformatics pipeline, 76 unrelated HB pedigrees were analyzed. The mutations identified were validated by comparison with the results of Sanger sequencing or Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification assays. The pathogenicity of the causative mutations was classified following the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guidelines.
resultsThe mutation detection rate was 94.74% (72/76) using NGS. Of the 76 HB pedigrees analyzed, 59 causative variants were found in 72 pedigrees, with 38 (64.41%) missense mutations, 9 (15.25%) nonsense mutations, 2 (3.39%) splicing mutations, 5 (8.47%) small deletions, 4 (6.78%) large deletions, and 1 intronic mutation (1.69%). Of the 59 different F9 mutations, 10 were novel: c.190T>G, c.199G>T, c.290G>C, c.322T>A, c.350_351insACAATAATTCCTA, c.391+5delG, c.416G>T, c.618_627delAGCTGAAACC, c.863delA, and c.1024_1027delACGA. Of these 10 novel mutations, a mosaic mutation, c.199G>T(p.Glu67Ter), was identified in a sporadic HB pedigree. Using in-silico analysis, these novel variants were predicted to be disease-causing. However, no potentially causative mutations were found in the F9 coding sequences of the four remaining HB pedigrees. In addition, two HB pedigrees carrying additional F8/F9 mutations were discovered.
conclusionThe identification of these mutations enriches the spectrum of F9 mutations and provides further insights into the pathogenesis of HB in the Chinese population.
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.