Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 5

1.

Assisted reproductive technologies do not enhance the variability of DNA methylation imprints in human.

Tierling S, Souren NY, Gries J, Loporto C, Groth M, Lutsik P, Neitzel H, Utz-Billing I, Gillessen-Kaesbach G, Kentenich H, Griesinger G, Sperling K, Schwinger E, Walter J.

J Med Genet. 2010 Jun;47(6):371-6. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2009.073189. Epub 2009 Nov 30.

PMID:
19948534
2.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of DNA methylation levels and imprinting disorders in children conceived by IVF/ICSI compared with children conceived spontaneously.

Lazaraviciute G, Kauser M, Bhattacharya S, Haggarty P, Bhattacharya S.

Hum Reprod Update. 2014 Nov-Dec;20(6):840-52. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmu033. Epub 2014 Jun 24. Review. Erratum in: Hum Reprod Update. 2015 Jul-Aug;21(4):555-7.

PMID:
24961233
3.

The impact of assisted reproductive technologies on the genome and epigenome of the newborn.

Kochanski A, Merritt TA, Gadzinowski J, Jopek A.

J Neonatal Perinatal Med. 2013;6(2):101-8. doi: 10.3233/NPM-1366812. Review.

PMID:
24246511
4.

The GNAS locus and pseudohypoparathyroidism.

Bastepe M.

Adv Exp Med Biol. 2008;626:27-40. Review.

PMID:
18372789
5.

Epigenetic imprinting during assisted reproductive technologies: The effect of temporal and cumulative fluctuations in methionine cycling on the DNA methylation state.

Hoeijmakers L, Kempe H, Verschure PJ.

Mol Reprod Dev. 2016 Feb;83(2):94-107. doi: 10.1002/mrd.22605. Epub 2016 Jan 7. Review.

PMID:
26660493

Supplemental Content

Support Center