Practical Neurology

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Practical Neurology 2007;7:62-63
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by de Silva, R.
Right arrow Articles by Davenport, R. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by de Silva, R.
Right arrow Articles by Davenport, R. J

Letters to the editor

Diagnostic DNA testing and consent

Rajith de Silva1

1 Department of Neurology, Essex Centre for Neurological Sciences, Queen’s Hospital, Romford, Essex RM7 0AG, UK

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In Richard Davenport’s description of an individual with ataxia harbouring an FMR1 gene permutation in the October issue of Practical Neurology,1 the patient’s detailed family history is not explored. This may occasionally provide a clue to the diagnosis. I am seeing a late middle-aged patient with a seven year history of tremor and ataxia, whose diagnosis emerged when her daughter’s son was diagnosed with fragile X syndrome. (In a case report entitled Genetics in reverse, Chinnery et al described a similar scenario.2) In Davenport’s case, one presumes that the diagnosis was achieved by applying the newly described test on a repository of undiagnosed patients’ DNA samples. Indeed he recommends retaining (DNA) samples on patients for future "diagnostic" use. The level of consent required for retaining and testing such specimens is not specified. As exemplified by FMR1 premutation cases, the implications on future generations may be huge, and . . . [Full text of this article]

Richard J Davenport2

2 Consultant Neurologist, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XY, UK; rjd@skull.dcn.ed.ac.uk




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PNHome page
R J Davenport
Why can't I make neurological diagnoses anymore?
Practical Neurology, April 1, 2008; 8(2): 74 - 76.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.