ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2023
Comprehensive Genetic Analysis Unraveled the Missing Heritability and a Founder Variant of BEST1 in a Chinese Cohort With Autosomal Recessive Bestrophinopathy.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and Genetic Features of Autosomal Recessive Bestrophinopathy: A Case Series from a Vietnamese Cohort.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- A novel founder variant in BEST1 gene causing autosomal recessive bestrophinopathy.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Clinical and genetic landscape of optic atrophy in 826 families: insights from 50 nuclear genes.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Micropulse transscleral cyclophotocoagulation in the treatment of autosomal recessive bestrophinopathy combined with angle closure glaucoma: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the genetic landscape of BEST1 for a large Chinese cohort with autosomal recessive bestrophinopathy (ARB), identify the missing heritability, and report a common Chinese founder variant. Methods: We recruited 65 patients from 63 families with a clinical diagnosis of ARB. All patients underwent ophthalmic examinations and comprehensive genetic analyses, including Sanger DNA sequencing of BEST1 and whole genome sequencing (WGS). The effects of deep intronic variants (DIVs) on splicing were assessed using in vitro splicing assays in HEK293T cells and patient-derived peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Haplotype mapping was performed for 17 unrelated patients harboring variant c.867+97G>A. Results: We identified 54 distinct disease-causing variants of BEST1 in 63 pedigrees, 62 probands with biallelic variants, and one family with monoallelic variants. Sanger DNA sequencing of BEST1 initially detected 51 variants in 61 pedigrees, including 19 probands with one heterozygous variant. Subsequent WGS, combined with supplementary Sanger sequencing, revealed three missing DIVs (c.1101-491A>G, c.867+97G>A, and c.867+97G>T) in 20 families. The novel DIV c.1101-491A>G caused an abnormal splicing resulting in a 204-nt pseudoexon (PE) insertion, whereas c.867+97G>A/T relatively strengthened an alternative donor site, resulting in a 203-nt intron retention (IR). The PE and IR generated a premature termination codon downstream. Haplotype analysis identified c.867+97G>A as a common founder variant with an allele frequency of 16%. Conclusions: Our results expand the pathogenic variant spectrum of BEST1, and DIVs can explain almost all of the missing heritability. The c.867+97G>A DIV is a common founder variant for Chinese patients with ARB.
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.