ArticleBMC genomics2024
Increasing the diagnostic yield of childhood glaucoma cases recruited into the 100,000 Genomes Project.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Eye Organoids Demonstrate Cadherin and Semaphorin Disruption inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Uncovering the Novel Genetic Determinants of Primary Congenital Glaucoma in Pakistani Families.Human mutation · 2026Article
- A novel indel CYP1B1 variant in a large multigenerational Pakistani family expands the mutation spectrum of primary congenital glaucoma.Molecular biology reports · 2025Article
- Genetic Basis of Non-Syndromic Childhood Glaucoma Associated with Anterior Segment Dysgenesis: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Congenital anterior segment ocular disorders: Genotype-phenotype correlations and emerging novel mechanisms.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Childhood glaucoma (CG) encompasses a heterogeneous group of genetic eye disorders that is responsible for approximately 5% of childhood blindness worldwide. Understanding the molecular aetiology is key to improving diagnosis, prognosis and unlocking the potential for optimising clinical management. In this study, we investigated 86 CG cases from 78 unrelated families of diverse ethnic backgrounds, recruited into the Genomics England 100,000 Genomes Project (GE100KGP) rare disease cohort, to improve the genetic diagnostic yield. Using the Genomics England/Genomic Medicine Centres (GE/GMC) diagnostic pipeline, 13 unrelated families were solved (13/78, 17%). Further interrogation using an expanded gene panel yielded a molecular diagnosis in 7 more unrelated families (7/78, 9%). This analysis effectively raises the total number of solved CG families in the GE100KGP to 26% (20/78 families). Twenty-five percent (5/20) of the solved families had primary congenital glaucoma (PCG), while 75% (15/20) had secondary CG; 53% of this group had non-acquired ocular anomalies (including iris hypoplasia, megalocornea, ectopia pupillae, retinal dystrophy, and refractive errors) and 47% had non-acquired systemic diseases such as cardiac abnormalities, hearing impairment, and developmental delay. CYP1B1 was the most frequently implicated gene, accounting for 55% (11/20) of the solved families. We identified two novel likely pathogenic variants in the TEK gene, in addition to one novel pathogenic copy number variant (CNV) in FOXC1. Variants that passed undetected in the GE100KGP diagnostic pipeline were likely due to limitations of the tiering process, the use of smaller gene panels during analysis, and the prioritisation of coding SNVs and indels over larger structural variants, CNVs, and non-coding variants.
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.