2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.02.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Panel-Based Clinical Genetic Testing in 85 Children with Inherited Retinal Disease

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
35
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
2
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to highlighting the possibility of extraocular involvement, genetic testing can help differentiate progressive from stationary IRD subtypes. 2 Here, we found that genetic testing helped reduce prognostic uncertainty in 25% (15/59) of study participants. Interestingly, approximately 1 in 4 children in whom a progressive disorder was strongly considered were shown to have a stationary condition ( Supplementary Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In addition to highlighting the possibility of extraocular involvement, genetic testing can help differentiate progressive from stationary IRD subtypes. 2 Here, we found that genetic testing helped reduce prognostic uncertainty in 25% (15/59) of study participants. Interestingly, approximately 1 in 4 children in whom a progressive disorder was strongly considered were shown to have a stationary condition ( Supplementary Table 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…A subset of participants underwent fundus imaging, and electrodiagnostic testing was performed in most children with a suspected diagnosis of albinism or IRD using previously described methods. 2 Where extraocular features were present or suspected, a full systemic assessment was undertaken by a consultant clinical geneticist.…”
Section: Phenotypic Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In 2002, we reported five families with patients affected by ACHM caused by mutations in GNAT2 (Kohl et al, ; Rosenberg et al, ). Since then only few reports of single families have been published (Aligianis et al, ; Piña, Baumert, Loyer, & Koenekoop, ; Ouechtati et al, ; Langlo et al, , Taylor et al, ; Carss et al, ; Ueno et al, ). Herein we report the results of our genetic investigation of our complete ACHM cohort over a period of 16 years, in total identifying 23 affected individuals from 19 independent families carrying likely disease‐causing mutations in GNAT2 , of which 12 mutations have never been reported before.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%