ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2024
High Clinical Exome Sequencing Diagnostic Rates and Novel Phenotypic Expansions for Nonisolated Microphthalmia, Anophthalmia, and Coloboma.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2024. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unveiling ocular developmental disorders through short-read whole-genome sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Expanding the Phenotypic Spectrum Associated With Loss-of-Function SMARCA4 Variants to Eye Developmental Anomalies.Clinical genetics · 2026Article
- Non-isolated tetralogy of fallot (TOF+): exome sequencing efficacy and phenotypic expansions.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Intragenic loss-of-function variants in transcription factorsJournal of medical genetics · 2026Article
- WNT4 deficiency impacts heart, diaphragm, and palate development: Insights from human genetics, machine learning, and mouse models.Developmental biology · 2026Article
- Genetic background of high myopia in children.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: A molecular diagnosis is only made in a subset of individuals with nonisolated microphthalmia, anophthalmia, and coloboma (MAC). This may be due to underutilization of clinical (whole) exome sequencing (cES) and an incomplete understanding of the genes that cause MAC. The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy of cES in cases of nonisolated MAC and to identify new MAC phenotypic expansions. Methods: We determined the efficacy of cES in 189 individuals with nonisolated MAC. We then used cES data, a validated machine learning algorithm, and previously published expression data, case reports, and animal models to determine which candidate genes were most likely to contribute to the development of MAC. Results: We found the efficacy of cES in nonisolated MAC to be between 32.3% (61/189) and 48.1% (91/189). Most genes affected in our cohort were not among genes currently screened in clinically available ophthalmologic gene panels. A subset of the genes implicated in our cohort had not been clearly associated with MAC. Our analyses revealed sufficient evidence to support low-penetrance MAC phenotypic expansions involving nine of these human disease genes. Conclusions: We conclude that cES is an effective means of identifying a molecular diagnosis in individuals with nonisolated MAC and may identify putatively damaging variants that would be missed if only a clinically available ophthalmologic gene panel was obtained. Our data also suggest that deleterious variants in BRCA2, BRIP1, KAT6A, KAT6B, NSF, RAC1, SMARCA4, SMC1A, and TUBA1A can contribute to the development of MAC.
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.