ArticleMolecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.)2026
Clinical and genetic heterogeneity of syndromic hearing loss and its non-syndromic hearing loss mimics.
Article in Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Genetic Landscape of Hearing Loss in Brazilian Patients Reveals Population-Specific Variants and Clinical Correlations.Clinical genetics · 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
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHearing loss (HL) is one of the most common congenital conditions and exhibits substantial clinical and genetic heterogeneity. More than 150 genes are associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL), while over 600 genes are linked to syndromic hearing loss (SHL). Importantly, the absence of additional clinical symptoms at the time of diagnosis does not necessarily exclude SHL. An increasing number of functionally disruptive variants in a growing number of genes have been shown to initially present as isolated HL, only later revealing syndromic features.
methodsWe analyzed clinical data from 111 patients across 102 unrelated families, selected from over 600 individuals negative for GJB2 and STRC variants. Molecular inversion probe panel, exome, or genome sequencing was performed, and patients were retrospectively divided into three subgroups following variant interpretation. Molecular docking was performed on select non-synonymous substitutions.
resultsSubgroup 1 included 30 patients with variants in neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD)-associated genes. HL was the first clinical manifestation in 80% of patients, with it being the sole first symptom in half. Subgroup 2 was comprised of 52 patients with variants in SHL-associated genes unrelated to NDD, while subgroup 3 included 29 patients with variants in genes associated with both NSHL and SHL, such as SLC26A4 and USH1C. In subgroups 2 and 3, HL was the sole initial symptom for nearly all patients (92% and 100%, respectively). Across the cohort, 99 variants in 44 genes were identified, including 36 novel variants.
conclusionThe frequent absence of syndromic features at presentation may lead to genetic testing or analysis restricted to NSHL-associated genes. Our findings highlight the critical role of comprehensive genomic testing in the diagnostic workup of HL, enabling earlier identification of syndromic forms and facilitating timely medical management, genetic counseling, and anticipatory care.
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.