ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2021
Clinical application of whole-exome sequencing: A retrospective, single-center study.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic interrogation for sequence and copy number variants in systemic lupus erythematosus.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- Human Exome Sequencing and Prospects for Predictive Medicine: Analysis of International Data and Own Experience.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to assess the practical diagnostic value of whole-exome sequencing (WES) in patients with different phenotypes and to explore possible strategies to increase the capability of WES in identifying disease-causing genes. A total of 1,360 patients (aged from 1 day to 42 years old) with manifestations of genetic diseases were genotyped using WES and statistical analysis was performed on the results obtained. Within this cohort, the overall positive rate of identification of a disease-causing gene alteration was 44.41%. The positive identification rate where trio-samples were used (from the proband and both parents) was higher than that where a single proband sample was used (50.00 vs. 43.71%), and 604 positive cases with 150 genetic syndromes, 510 genes and 718 mutations were detected. Missense mutations were the most common variations (n=335, 45.27%) and visual or auditory abnormalities (58.51%) had the highest rate of association with a genetic abnormality. The positive detection rate of WES was elevated with the increase in the number of clinical symptoms from 1 to 8. The present study indicated that WES may be used as a valuable tool in the clinic and the positive rate depends more on the professional experience of clinicians rather than on the analytical capabilities of the data analyst. At the same time, particular attention must be paid to certain possible factors (such as the age of the patients as well as possible exon deletions), which may affect the diagnostic rate while applying this process.
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.