Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 464

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genetic Testing in the Long QT Syndrome: Development and Validation of an Efficient Approach to Genotyping in Clinical Practice

Napolitano, Carlo, Priori, Silvia G., Schwartz, Peter J., Bloise, Raffaella, Ronchetti, Elena, Nastoli, Janni, Bottelli, Georgia, Cerrone, Marina, Leonardi, Sergio·2005·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: In long QT syndrome (LQTS), disease severity and response to therapy vary according to the genetic loci. There exists a critical need to devise strategies to expedite genetic analysis. OBJECTIVE: To perform genetic screening in patients with LQTS to determine the yield of genetic testing, as well as the type and the prevalence of mutations. DESIGN, PATIENTS, AND SETTING: We investigated whether the detection of a set of frequently mutated codons in the KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A genes may translate in a novel strategy for rapid efficient genetic testing of 430 consecutive patients referred to our center between June 1996 and June 2004. The entire coding regions of KCNQ1, KCNH2, SCN5A, KCNE1, and KCNE2 were screened by denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography and DNA sequencing. The frequency and the type of mutations were defined to identify a set of recurring mutations. A separate cohort of 75 consecutive probands was used as a validation group to quantify prospectively the prevalence of the recurring mutations identified in the primary LQTS population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of a novel approach to LQTS genotyping. RESULTS: We identified 235 different mutations, 138 of which were novel, in 310 (72%) of 430 probands (49% KCNQ1, 39% KCNH2, 10% SCN5A, 1.7% KCNE1, and 0.7% KCNE2). Fifty-eight percent of probands carried nonprivate mutations in 64 codons of KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A genes. A similar occurrence of mutations at these codons (52%) was confirmed in the prospective cohort of 75 probands and in previously published LQTS cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed an approach to improve the efficiency of genetic screening for LQTS. This novel method may facilitate wider access to genotyping resulting in better risk stratification and treatment of LQTS patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.294.23.2975

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Napolitano, C., Priori, S. G., Schwartz, P. J., Bloise, R., Ronchetti, E., Nastoli, J., Bottelli, G., Cerrone, M., & Leonardi, S.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2005-12-21
Volume
294
Issue
23
Pages
2975
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2151361417
Cited by
464
References
3
FWCI
19.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.