ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2024
Validation of the Utility of the Genetically Shared Regions of Chromosomes (GD-ICS) Measuring Method in Identifying Complicated Genetic Relatedness.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2024. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRelatives share more genomic regions than unrelated individuals, with closer relatives sharing more regions. This concept, paired with the increased availability of high-throughput single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping technologies, has made it feasible to measure the shared chromosomal regions between individuals to assess their level of relation to each other. However, such techniques have remained in the conceptual rather than practical stages in terms of applying measures or indices. Recently, we developed an index called "genetic distance-based index of chromosomal sharing (GD-ICS)" utilizing large-scale SNP data from Korean family samples and demonstrated its potential for practical applications in kinship determination. In the current study, we present validation results from various real cases demonstrating the utility of this method in resolving complex familial relationships where information obtained from traditional short tandem repeats (STRs) or lineage markers is inconclusive.
methodsWe obtained large-scale SNP data through microarray analysis from Korean individuals involving 13 kinship cases and calculated GD-ICS values using the method described in our previous study. Based on the GD-ICS reference constructed for Korean families, each disputed kinship was evaluated and validated using a combination of traditional STRs and lineage markers.
resultsThe cases comprised those A) that were found to be inconclusive using the traditional approach, B) for which it was difficult to apply traditional testing methods, and C) that were more conclusively resolved using the GD-ICS method. This method has overcome the limitations faced by traditional STRs in kinship testing, particularly in a paternity case with STR mutational events and in confirming distant kinship where the individual of interest is unavailable for testing. It has also been demonstrated to be effective in identifying various relationships without specific presumptions and in confirming a lack of genetic relatedness between individuals.
conclusionThis method has been proven effective in identifying familial relationships across diverse complex and practical scenarios. It is not only useful when traditional testing methods fail to provide conclusive results, but it also enhances the resolution of challenging kinship cases, which suggests its applicability in various types of practical casework.
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.