Cited by 17Genetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersGenomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases

Intragenic probe used for diagnostics in fragile X families

Verkerk, Annemieke J. M. H., De Vries, Bert B. A., Niermeijer, Martinus F., Fu, Ying‐Hui, Nelson, David L., Warren, Stephen T., Majoor‐Krakauer, Danielle F., Halley, Dicky J. J. +1 more·1992·American Journal of Medical Genetics

Abstract

The intragenic (FMR‐1) probe pE5.1 was used for DNA analysis in fragile X families. With this probe fragments of altered size can be detected in female carriers, affected individuals and transmitting males. the length of the altered fragments was found to vary from one generation to another as well as between sibs. This instability of the DNA detected by pE5.1 was also seen in peripheral blood within single individuals. These phenomena are illustrated by 4 exemplary families segregating the fragile X syndrome. We demonstrate the diagnostic contribution of intragenic analysis to carrier detection as well as the identification of normal transmitting males carrying premutations. One of the families illustrates the passage of a premutation to a male through 2 generations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajmg.1320430132

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cytogenetic diagnosis of fragile X syndrome has been replaced by molecular analysis of FMR1 DNA using Southern blot and PCR.

    “Cytogenetic methods (6) used in the past to diagnose FXS have been replaced by molecular diagnostic of FMR1 DNA using Southern blot analysis and, more recently, PCR.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verkerk, A. J. M. H., De Vries, B. B. A., Niermeijer, M. F., Fu, Y., Nelson, D. L., Warren, S. T., Majoor‐Krakauer, D. F., Halley, D. J. J., & Oostra, B. A.
Affiliations
  • Academisch Ziekenhuis Rotterdam (NL)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Oostra, Ben A.
Venue
American Journal of Medical Genetics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1992-04-15
Volume
43
Issue
1-2
Pages
192-196
ISSN
  • 0148-7299 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8628
OpenAlex
W2155364743
Cited by
17
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Medical Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Keywords
fragile X syndrome, FMR1 gene, premutation, carrier detection, DNA instability, FMR1 repeat expansion
MeSH terms
DNA, DNA Mutational Analysis, Female, Fragile X Syndrome, Genetic Carrier Screening, Humans, Male, Pedigree, Repetitive Sequences, Nucleic Acid, DNA Probes, Gene Expression

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