ArticleAnnals of Indian Academy of Neurology
The Clinical Diagnostic Utility of Array CGH in Children with Syndromic Microcephaly.
Article in Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A prospective study using array CGH in children with Syndromic microcephaly from a tertiary pediatric healthcare centre in India. Aim: To identify the copy number variations causative of microcephaly detected through chromosomal array CGH. Patients and Methods: Of the 60 patients, 33 (55%) males and 27 (45%) females who consulted the Rare Disease Clinic at Department of Pediatrics, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, with developmental delay/facial dysmorphism/congenital anomalies in combination with microcephaly were included. Exclusion Criteria: Children with acquired or non-genetic causes of microcephaly, craniosynostosis, metabolic diseases, known chromosomal aneuploidy such as trisomy 21, 13, and 18 and abnormal karyotype were excluded. The cohort was analyzed by array CGH in order to identify potentially pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs). Results: Clinically relevant pathogenic or likely pathogenic copy number variations (CNVs) were identified in 20/60 (33.3%) patients, variant of uncertain significance (VOUS) in 4/60 (6.6%) cases and benign CNVs in 3/60 (5%) of total cases. Out of 20 cases with pathogenic CNVs, 12 (60%) patients detected with a deletion, five (25%) patients with duplication and three (15%) patients resulted with a complex chromosomal rearrangement. Twelve cases present CNVs containing genes known to be implicated in microcephaly etiology. Conclusion: This research highlights the contribution of submicroscopic chromosomal changes in the etiology of microcephaly in combination with developmental delay/facial dysmorphism/congenital anomalies (syndromic microcephaly). Our studies provide more insights into the benefits derived by using array CGH analysis in patients with syndromic microcephaly.
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.