ReviewBMC pediatrics2024
Clinical and molecular cytogenetic findings of cat eye syndrome and a 2-year-old patient with congenital aural atresia and hearing loss.
Review in BMC pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heterozygous CECR2 variants support a distinct neurodevelopmental syndrome with features overlapping cat eye syndrome.HGG advances · 2026Article
- Cat Eye Syndrome in a Sudanese Infant: Congenital Cataract in the Absence of Iris Coloboma: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Clinical and molecular characterization of 18p deletion syndrome and a novel case with reproductive disorder.Molecular cytogenetics · 2026Article
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
backgroundCat eye syndrome (CES) is a rare congenital disease frequently caused by a partial tetrasomy of the proximal long (q) arm of chromosome 22, due to a small supernumerary marker chromosome (sSMC). CES patients show remarkable phenotypic variability. Despite the progress of molecular cytogenetic technology, the cause of phenotypic variability and the genotype-phenotype correlations remain unknown.
methodsWe analyzed clinical and genetic data of a new patient with CES together with 27 previously reported ones with a confirmed genomic gain in the PubMed database between 2012 and 2023.
resultsWe reported a boy with CES carrying a 22q11.1-q11.21 duplication of 1.76 Mb tetrasomy (16888900_18644241, hg19) who presented currently rare or unreported clinical findings such as congenital aural atresia, hearing loss, PLSVC, and IVC. The results of the whole exome sequencing (WES) showed a heterozygous mutation of the GJB2 gene (NM_004004.6: exon2: c.109G > A). In addition, the results of our literature review showed that the presence of a classical sSMC was the most frequent cytogenetic abnormality in CES (82%). 63% of cases were in a homogenous state and 37% of cases were in a mosaic state. 72% of cases had a 1-2 Mb duplication. In the majority of CES patients the breakpoints in chromosome 22 are localized to a 50 kb region (18610000_18660000 bp). The CES critical region (CESCR) may be further delimited to a 0.3 Mb region (17799398_18111588 bp). Within this region CECR2, SLC25A18, ATP6V1E1, and BCL2L13 are strong candidate genes for causing the main CES phenotype. The ear anomalies are the most frequent features in CES patients (89%) and hearing loss was present in 36% of CES patients.
conclusionsThe phenotypic features in CES are highly variable. Our findings expand the symptom spectrum of CES and lay the foundation for better delineating the clinical phenotype, molecular cytogenetic features associated with CES and genotype-phenotype correlations. We recommend performing WES to rule out the involvement of other genetic factors in the patient's phenotype. In addition, our findings also highlight the need for genetic counseling and recurrence risk assessment.
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.