[Scientific integrity faces plagiarism fabricated with the ChatGPT]. / La integridad científica ante los plagios fabricados con el ChatGPT.

Among the malpractices that undermine research integrity, plagiarism is a major threat given its frequency and evolving presentations. Plagiarism implies the intentional grabbing of texts, ideas, images, or data belonging to others and without crediting them. However, the different and even masked forms of plagiarism often difficult a clear identification. Currently, the many kinds of fraud and plagiarism account for most retractions in traditional and open access journals. Further, the rate of retracted articles is higher in the Latin American databases LILACS and Scielo than in PubMed and Web of Science. This difference has been related to the typical laxity of our culture and the lack of English writing skills of non-Anglophone researchers. These features explain the conflict experienced by Latin American students in USA where they face a stricter culture regarding academic and scientific plagiarism. In the internet era, the ease of accessing scientific literature has increased the temptation to plagiarize but this ethical breach has been countered by antiplagiarism software. Now, the so-called "paraphragiarism" prompted by paraphrasing tools exceeds the infamous "copy-paste". For instance, the innovative ChatGPT can be used for plagiarizing and paraphragiarizing. Moreover, its inclusion as coauthor in scientific papers has been banned by prestigious journals and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors because such chatbot cannot meet the required public responsibility criterium. To avoid plagiarism, it is enough to always give due credit in the proper way. Lastly, I question the ill-fated and now prevailing conjunction of blind faith in progress and zero skepticism that prevents us from foreseeing the negative consequences of technological advances.

De entre las malas prácticas que socavan la integridad científica destaca el plagio, tanto por su frecuencia como por sus cada vez más evolucionadas presentaciones. Plagiar implica apropiarse intencionalmente de textos, ideas, imágenes o datos ajenos sin dar el crédito debido. Sin embargo, las muchas y, a veces, sutiles maneras de plagiar dificultan identificar esta práctica deshonesta. Los fraudes y plagios explican la mayoría de los artículos retractados en revistas tradicionales y en las de acceso abierto. Además, las retractaciones por plagios en las bases de datos LILACS y SciELO exceden las reportadas en PubMed y Web of Science. Dicha diferencia se atribuye a la permisividad propia de nuestra cultura y a la dificultad para escribir en inglés que los académicos no angloparlantes enfrentamos. Tales peculiaridades explican el conflicto que experimentan los estudiantes latinoamericanos de posgrado en Estados Unidos, país cuya cultura es mucho más estricta en cuestión de plagios académicos y científicos. Al facilitar el acceso a la literatura científica, los avances digitales han propiciado los plagios, pero también el desarrollo de programas para detectar tales apropiaciones. Además del burdo "copiar y pegar", las herramientas para parafrasear han refinado y quizá aumentado el llamado "parafragio". Así, el novedoso ChatGPT puede usarse para plagiar y "parafragiar". Peor aún, la inclusión del ChatGPT como coautor de artículos científicos ha llevado a que el International Committee of Medical Journal Editors y editoriales de prestigio precisen que tal recurso no debe incluirse en la lista de autores. Para evitar el plagio, basta dar siempre el crédito a quien corresponda y apropiadamente. Por último, cuestiono la fe ciega en el progreso y el nulo escepticismo ahora imperantes que nos impiden prever las consecuencias negativas de los avances tecnológicos.

The Effect of Visit-to-Visit Blood Pressure Variability on Renal Function in Geriatric Chronic Kidney Disease.

OBJECTIVE: The visit-to-visit variability (VVV) of blood pressure (BP) has been recognized as a risk factor for cardiovascular events and chronic kidney disease (CKD). The objective of this study is to valuate the association between the VVV of BP and changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in elderly CKD patients at different stages of renal function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 60 months, we analyzed the medical records of 105 patients with and without diabetes and hypertension. Systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and pulse pressure (PP) were examined. A multivariable linear regression model was used to analyze the correlation between eGFR and the VVV of BP. RESULTS: No differences were demonstrated between the groups in the clinical characteristics. Mean SBP and DBP were not significant between the groups, and we observed no decrease in renal function. A significant negative correlation between PP and eGFR was observed in the total CKD population with a P of .010 (95% CI: -0.20, -0.03) and a correlation coefficient of -0.11. CONCLUSION: Our study shows no statistical significances in terms of the VVVs of BP in any of the geriatric groups, with no significant decreases in renal function. However, we observed a significant negative correlation between PP and eGFR. We demonstrated that if a VVV of BP does not occur, there is no decrease in eGFR.

A chromoanagenesis-driven ultra-complex t(5;7;21)dn truncates neurodevelopmental genes in a disabled boy as revealed by whole-genome sequencing.

Germline or constitutional chromoanagenesis-related complex chromosomal rearrangements (CCRs) are rare, apparently "all-at-once", catastrophic events that occur in a single cell cycle, exhibit an unexpected complexity, and sometimes correlate with a severe abnormal phenotype. The term chromoanagenesis encompasses three distinct phenomena, namely chromothripsis, chromoanasynthesis, and chromoplexy. Herein, we found hallmarks of chromothripsis and chromoplexy in an ultra-complex t(5;7;21)dn involving several disordered breakpoint junctions (BPJs) accompanied by some microdeletions and the disruption of neurodevelopmental genes in a patient with a phenotype resembling autosomal dominant MRD44 (OMIM 617061). G-banded chromosomes and FISH showed that the CCR implied the translocation of the 5p15.2→pter segment onto 7q11.23; in turn, the fragment 7q11.23→qter of der(7) separated into two pieces: the segment q11.23→q32 translocated onto 5p15.2 and fused to 21q22.1→ter in the der(5) while the distal 7q32→qter segment translocated onto der(21) at q22.1. Subsequent whole-genome sequencing unveiled that CCT5, CMBL, RETREG1, MYO10, and TRIO from der(5), IMMP2L, TES, VPS37D, DUS4L, TYW1B, and FEZF1-AS1 from der(7), and TIAM1 and SOD1 from der(21), were disrupted by BPJs, whereas some other genes (predicted to be haplosufficient or inconsequential) were completely deleted. Although remarkably CCT5, TRIO, TES, MYO10, and TIAM1 (and even VPS37D) cooperate in key biological processes for normal neuronal development such as cell adhesion, migration, growth, and/or cytoskeleton formation, the disruption of TRIO most likely caused the patient's MRD44-like phenotype, including intellectual disability, microcephaly, finger anomalies, and facial dysmorphia. Our observation represents the first truncation of TRIO related to a chromoanagenesis event and therefore expands the mutational spectrum of this crucial gene. Moreover, our findings indicate that more than one mechanism is involved in modeling the architecture of ultra-complex rearrangements.

A paternal t(6;22)(q25.3;p12) leading to a deleted and satellited der(6) in a short-lived infant.

BACKGROUND: Non-acrocentric satellited chromosomes mostly result from familial balanced insertions or translocations with p12 or p13 of any acrocentric. Although all non-acrocentrics have been involved, only 12 instances of chromosome 6 involvement are known. CASE PRESENTATION: A female infant exhibited clinical features typical of 6qter deletions and also generalized hypertrichosis and synophrys, traits seldom reported in patients with similar imbalances or haploinsufficiency of ARID1B located in 6q25.3. She had a paternal derivative satellited 6q of a t(6;22)(q25.3;p12)pat entailing a 6q terminal deletion, karyotype 46,XX,der(6)t(6;22)(q25.3;p12)pat [16].ish del 6q subtel-. CONCLUSION: Male and female carriers of reciprocal translocations or insertions between chromosome 6 and the short arm of any acrocentric have few unbalanced offspring mostly by adjacent-1 segregation. In addition, spontaneous abortions or male infertility was present in 7/13 instances of satellited chromosome 6.

Williams-Beuren syndrome in Mexican patients confirmed by FISH and assessed by aCGH.

Williams-Beuren syndrome (WBS) has a prevalence of 1/7500-20000 live births and results principally from a de novo deletion in 7q11.23 with a length of 1.5 Mb or 1.8 Mb. This study aimed to determine the frequency of 7q11.23 deletion, size of the segment lost, and involved genes in 47 patients with a clinical diagnosis of WBS and analysed by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH); among them, 31 had the expected deletion. Micro-array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) confirmed the loss in all 18 positive-patients tested: 14 patients had a 1.5 Mb deletion with the same breakpoints at 7q11.23 (hg19: 72726578-74139390) and comprising 24 coding genes from TRIM50 to GTF2I. Four patients showed an atypical deletion: two had a 1.6 Mb loss encompassing 27 coding genes, from NSUN5 to GTF2IRD2; another had a 1.7 Mb deletion involving 27 coding genes, from POM121 to GTF2I; the remaining patient presented a deletion of 1.2 Mb that included 21 coding genes from POM121 to LIMK1. aCGH confirmed the lack of deletion in 5/16 negative-patients by FISH. All 47 patients had the characteristic facial phenotype of WBS and 45 of 47 had the typical behavioural and developmental abnormalities. Our observations further confirm that patients with a classical deletion present a typical WBS phenotype, whereas those with a high (criteria of the American Association of Pediatrics, APP) clinical score but lacking the expected deletion may harbour an ELN point mutation. Overall, the concomitant CNVs appeared to be incidental findings.

Fake Peer Review and Inappropriate Authorship Are Real Evils.

Inappropriate authorship and other fraudulent publication strategies are pervasive. Here, I deal with contribution disclosures, authorship disputes versus plagiarism among collaborators, kin co-authorship, gender bias, authorship trade, and fake peer review (FPR). In contrast to underserved authorship and other ubiquitous malpractices, authorship trade and FPR appear to concentrate in some Asian countries that exhibit a mixed academic pattern of rapid growth and poor ethics. It seems that strong pressures to publish coupled with the incessantly growing number of publications entail a lower quality of published science in part attributable to a poor, compromised or even absent (in predatory journals) peer review. In this regard, the commitment of Publons to strengthen this fundamental process and ultimately ensure the quality and integrity of the published articles is laudable. Because the many recommendations for adherence to authorship guidelines and rules of honest and transparent research reporting have been rather ineffective, strong deterrents should be established to end manipulated peer review, undeserved authorship, and related fakeries.

22q11.2 deletion detected by in situ hybridization in Mexican patients with velocardiofacial syndrome-like features.

INTRODUCTION: Deletion 22q11.2 occurs in 1:4,000-1:6,000 live births while 10p13p14 deletion is found in 1:200,000 newborns. Both deletions have similar clinical features such as congenital heart disease and immunological anomalies. OBJECTIVE: We looked for a 22q11.2 deletion in Mexican patients with craniofacial dysmorphisms suggestive of DiGeorge or velocardiofacial syndromes and at least one major phenotypic feature (cardiac anomaly, immune deficiency, palatal defects or development delay). METHODS: A prospective study of 39 patients recruited in 2012-2015 at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social at Guadalajara, Mexico. The patients with velocardiofacial syndrome-like features or a confirmed tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) or complex cardiopathy were studied by G-banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with a dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA or TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3) probe, six patients without the 22q11.2 deletion (arbitrarily selected) were tested with the dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1 probe. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (7 males and 15 females) had the 22q11.2 deletion and 17/39 did not have it; no patient had a 10p loss. Among the 22 deleted patients, 19 had congenital heart disease (mostly TOF). Twelve patients without deletion had heart defects such as TOF (4/12), isolate ventricular septal defect (2/12) or other disorders (6/12). CONCLUSION: In our small sample about ~56% of the patients, regardless of the clinical diagnosis, had the expected 22q11.2 deletion. We remark the importance of early cytogenetic diagnosis in order to achieve a proper integral management of the patients and their families.

INTRODUCCIÓN: La deleción 22q11.2 ocurre con una frecuencia de 1:4,000-1:6,000 nacidos vivos, mientras que la deleción 10p13p14 es detectada en 1:200,000 recién nacidos. Ambas deleciones comparten características clínicas similares tales como defectos cardiacos congénitos y anomalías inmunológicas. OBJETIVO: Identificar la deleción 22q11.2 en pacientes mexicanos con dismorfismo craneofacial sugestivo de síndrome DiGeorge o velocardiofacial y por lo menos con una característica clínica mayor (anomalía cardiaca, deficiencia inmunológica, defectos en paladar o retardo en el desarrollo). MÉTODOS: Estudio prospectivo de 39 pacientes captados entre 2012-2015 en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social en Guadalajara, México. Los pacientes con características clínicas sugerentes de síndrome velocardiofacial o diagnostico confirmado de tetralogía de Fallot (TOF) o cardiopatía compleja fueron estudiados por bandas G y por hibridación in situ fluorescente (FISH) con una sonda dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA o TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3), seis pacientes sin la deleción 22q11.2 (seleccionados arbitrariamente) fueron estudiados con la sonda dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1. RESULTADOS: Veintidós pacientes (7 hombres y 15 mujeres) tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 y 17/39 no la tuvieron, ningún paciente tuvo la pérdida de 10p. Entre los 22 pacientes delecionados, 19 tuvieron defecto cardiaco congénito (principalmente TOF). Doce pacientes sin la deleción tuvieron defectos cardiacos congénitos como TOF (4/12), defecto del septo ventricular aislado (2/12) y otros trastornos cardiacos (6/12). CONCLUSIÓN: En nuestra pequeña muestra, alrededor de ~56% de los pacientes, independientemente de su diagnostico clínico, tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 esperada. Resaltamos la importancia del diagnóstico citogenético temprano para determinar un apropiado manejo integral para el paciente y sus familiares.

22q11.2 deletion detected by in situ hybridization in Mexican patients with velocardiofacial syndrome-like features / Deleción 22q11.2 detectada por hibridación in situ en pacientes mexicanos con características clínicas similares al síndrome velocardiofacial

Abstract Introduction: Deletion 22q11.2 occurs in 1:4,000-1:6,000 live births while 10p13p14 deletion is found in 1:200,000 newborns. Both deletions have similar clinical features such as congenital heart disease and immunological anomalies. Objective: We looked for a 22q11.2 deletion in Mexican patients with craniofacial dysmorphisms suggestive of DiGeorge or velocardiofacial syndromes and at least one major phenotypic feature (cardiac anomaly, immune deficiency, palatal defects or development delay). Methods: A prospective study of 39 patients recruited in 2012-2015 at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social at Guadalajara, Mexico. The patients with velocardiofacial syndrome-like features or a confirmed tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) or complex cardiopathy were studied by G-banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with a dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA or TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3) probe, six patients without the 22q11.2 deletion (arbitrarily selected) were tested with the dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1 probe. Results: Twenty-two patients (7 males and 15 females) had the 22q11.2 deletion and 17/39 did not have it; no patient had a 10p loss. Among the 22 deleted patients, 19 had congenital heart disease (mostly TOF). Twelve patients without deletion had heart defects such as TOF (4/12), isolate ventricular septal defect (2/12) or other disorders (6/12). Conclusion: In our small sample about ~56% of the patients, regardless of the clinical diagnosis, had the expected 22q11.2 deletion. We remark the importance of early cytogenetic diagnosis in order to achieve a proper integral management of the patients and their families.

Resumen Introducción: La deleción 22q11.2 ocurre con una frecuencia de 1:4,000-1:6,000 nacidos vivos, mientras que la deleción 10p13p14 es detectada en 1:200,000 recién nacidos. Ambas deleciones comparten características clínicas similares tales como defectos cardiacos congénitos y anomalías inmunológicas. Objetivo: Identificar la deleción 22q11.2 en pacientes mexicanos con dismorfismo craneofacial sugestivo de síndrome DiGeorge o velocardiofacial y por lo menos con una característica clínica mayor (anomalía cardiaca, deficiencia inmunológica, defectos en paladar o retardo en el desarrollo) Métodos: Estudio prospectivo de 39 pacientes captados entre 2012-2015 en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social en Guadalajara, México. Los pacientes con características clínicas sugerentes de síndrome velocardiofacial o diagnostico confirmado de tetralogía de Fallot (TOF) o cardiopatía compleja fueron estudiados por bandas G y por hibridación in situ fluorescente (FISH) con una sonda dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA o TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3), seis pacientes sin la deleción 22q11.2 (seleccionados arbitrariamente) fueron estudiados con la sonda dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1. Resultados: Veintidós pacientes (7 hombres y 15 mujeres) tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 y 17/39 no la tuvieron, ningún paciente tuvo la pérdida de 10p. Entre los 22 pacientes delecionados, 19 tuvieron defecto cardiaco congénito (principalmente TOF). Doce pacientes sin la deleción tuvieron defectos cardiacos congénitos como TOF (4/12), defecto del septo ventricular aislado (2/12) y otros trastornos cardiacos (6/12). Conclusión: En nuestra pequeña muestra, alrededor de ~56% de los pacientes, independientemente de su diagnostico clínico, tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 esperada. Resaltamos la importancia del diagnóstico citogenético temprano para determinar un apropiado manejo integral para el paciente y sus familiares.

[Academic communication and honesty]. / Comunicación y honestidad académicas.

No abstract.

Sin abstract.

Síndrome de Wolf-Hirschhorn: ¿simple omisión al citar? / Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome: just a citation omission?

No disponible

Two familial intrachromosomal insertions with maternal dup(6)(p22.3p25.3) or dup(2)(q24.2q32.1) in recombinant offspring.

In this study, we describe two patients with a recombinant chromosome secondary to a maternal intrachromosomal insertion. Patient 1 was a girl with dup(6)(p22.3p25.3). Patient 2 was a boy with dup(2)(q24.2q32.1). Both familial rearrangements were characterized by means of GTG-bands, fluorescence in-situ hybridization, and comparative genomic hybridization microarray analyses. Patient 1 had an ∼23 Mb gain that involved the bands 6p22.3-6p25.3. Patient 2 had an ∼23 Mb gain (cytobands 2q24.2-2q32.1) and a further ∼1.9 Mb gain of 2p16.2-p16.3. The phenotype of each patient was in agreement with the typical 6p duplication or 2q24.2q32.1 duplication syndrome. The compound macular lesion in patient 1 suggests that retinal anomalies may be a part of the 6p trisomy phenotype. Among the 70 intrachromosomal insertions compiled here (including 68 from the literature), four were submicroscopic unbalanced insertions inherited from a balanced carrier and 66 were detectable on banded chromosomes (with or without array comparative genomic hybridization or other high-resolution assessment) and therefore spanned at least 5 Mb. Pericentric insertions are found in most chromosomes, whereas the paracentric ones are mainly observed in large and medium chromosome arms. That the former outnumber the latter in almost a 2 : 1 ratio appears to be related to the technique of diagnosis, size of the insertion, and size of the involved chromosome. Regardless of the apparent excess of carrier mothers, carriers of an intrachromosomal insertion beget almost twice as many children with a duplication than with a deletion.

Two girls with a de novo Xq rearrangement of paternal origin: t(X;9)(q24;q12) or rea(X)dup q.

OBJECTIVE: We report on two rare Xq rearrangements, namely a t(X;9)(q24;q12) found in a mildly-affected girl (Patient 1) and a rea(X)dup q concomitant with a rob(14;21)mat in a Down syndrome girl (Patient 2). CASE REPORT: Both rearrangements were characterized by banding techniques [Giemsa (G), constitutive heterochromatin (C), and bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) pulse], fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, human androgen receptor (HUMAR) assays, and microarray analyses. Patient 1 had a t(X;9)(q24;q12)dn. Patient 2 had a de novo rea(X)(qter→q23 or q24::p11.2→qter) concomitant with an unbalanced rob(14;21)mat. X-Inactivation studies in metaphases and DNA revealed a fully skewed inactivation: the normal homolog was silenced in Patient 1 and the rea(X) in Patient 2. Both rearranged X chromosomes were of paternal descent. Microarray analyses revealed no imbalances in Patient 1 whereas loss of Xp (∼52 Mb) and duplication of Xq (∼44 Mb) and 21q were confirmed in Patient 2. CONCLUSION: Our observations further document the cytogenetic heterogeneity and predominant paternal origin of certain de novo X-chromosome rearrangements.