Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Patterns of homozygosity in patients with uniparental disomy: detection rate and suggested reporting thresholds for SNP microarrays
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Patterns of homozygosity in patients with uniparental disomy: detection rate and suggested reporting thresholds for SNP microarrays
Do you wish to request the book?
Patterns of homozygosity in patients with uniparental disomy: detection rate and suggested reporting thresholds for SNP microarrays
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Patterns of homozygosity in patients with uniparental disomy: detection rate and suggested reporting thresholds for SNP microarrays
2018
Overview
Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarrays can easily identify whole-chromosome isodisomy but are unable to detect whole-chromosome heterodisomy. However, most cases of uniparental disomy (UPD) involve combinations of heterodisomy and isodisomy, visualized on SNP microarrays as long continuous stretches of homozygosity (LCSH). LCSH raise suspicion for, but are not diagnostic of, UPD, and reporting necessitates confirmatory testing. The goal of this study was to define optimal LCSH reporting standards.
Eighty-nine individuals with known UPD were analyzed using chromosomal microarray. The LCSH patterns were compared with those in a phenotypically normal population to predict the clinical impact of various reporting thresholds. False-positive and -negative rates were calculated at various LCSH thresholds.
Twenty-seven of 84 cases with UPD had no significant LCSH on the involved chromosome. Fifty UPD-positive samples had LCSH of varying sizes: the average size of terminal LCSH was 11.0 megabases while the average size of interstitial LCSH was 24.1 megabases. LCSH in the normal population tended to be much smaller (average 4.3 megabases) and almost exclusively interstitial; however, overlap between the populations was noted.
We hope that this work will aid clinical laboratories in the recognition and reporting of LCSH.
Publisher
Elsevier Inc,Nature Publishing Group US,Elsevier Limited
