ArticleAnnals of pediatric cardiology
Article in Annals of pediatric cardiology. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The first description of CTNNB1 syndrome in the Tunisian population: clinical investigation, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation of β-catenin/E-cadherin complex.Molecular biology reports · 2025Article
- Whole-Exome Sequencing Identifies Novel GATA5/6 Variants in Right-Sided Congenital Heart Defects.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) have a 40%-60% chance of being born with congenital heart disease (CHD). This indicates that CHD in individuals with DS is not solely caused by trisomy 21, and there may be other genetic factors contributing to the development of CHD in these children. A study has identified variants in the specific genes that contribute to the pathogenesis of CHD in children with DS, isolated DS, and the CHD group. Computational studies on these identified variants, which, together with trisomy 21, determine the risk for CHD in DS cases, were limited. Here, we aimed to identify the impact of the identified variants that contribute to the pathogenesis of CHD in children with DS through in silico prediction, molecular modeling, and dynamics studies. Methodology and Results: The target single-nucleotide polymorphisms included in the study were examined for pathogenicity, residue conservation, and protein structural changes. The structural predictions were done using I-TASSER, Robetta, SWISS-MODEL, and Phyre2 tools. Further, the predicted models were validated through the PROCHECK server and molecular dynamics simulation using GROMACS software. The conservation analysis conducted on the identified variant highlights its significance in relation to the genetic disorders. Furthermore, a dynamics simulation study revealed the impact of the variant on protein structural stability (≤3 Å), providing valuable insights into its pathogenicity. We have also observed that the structure of the centrosomal protein of 290 kDa gene is relatively unstable, which may be attributed to its exclusive inclusion of helices within its secondary structural components. Conclusions: This computational study explores, for the first time, the association between genes and CHD-DS, evaluating the identified specific frameshift variants. The observed pathogenic mutations in CHD-DS patients require further experimental validation and may contribute to the development of prospective drug design research. The insights gained from the structural and functional implications of these variants could potentially serve as a cornerstone in the development of effective treatments for this debilitating condition.
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.