Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10224562›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics1999

Accuracy of preimplantation diagnosis of single-gene disorders by polar body analysis of oocytes.

S Rechitsky, C Strom, O Verlinsky, T Amet, V Ivakhnenko, V Kukharenko, A Kuliev, Y Verlinsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Polar body diagnosis - a step in the right direction?Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2008
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Molecular diagnostics in preimplantation genetic diagnosis.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2002
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

S RechitskyReproductive Genetics Institute, Chicago, Illinois 60657, USA.
C Strom
O Verlinsky
T Amet
V Ivakhnenko
V Kukharenko
A Kuliev
Y Verlinsky

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA number of pitfalls in single-cell DNA analysis, including undetected DNA contamination, undetected allele drop out, and preferential amplification, may lead to misdiagnosis in preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single-gene disorders.

methodsPreimplantation genetic diagnosis was performed by sequential first and second polar body analysis of oocytes in 26 couples at risk for having children with various single-gene disorders. Mutant genes were amplified simultaneously with linked polymorphic markers, and only embryos resulting from the mutation-free oocytes predicted by polar body analysis with confirmation by polymorphic marker testing were transferred back to patients.

resultsOverall 529 oocytes from 48 clinical cycles (26 patients) were tested, resulting in the transfer of 106 embryos in 44 clinical cycles. As many as 46 (9.6%) instances of allele dropout were observed, the majority (96%) of which were detected. Seventeen unaffected pregnancies were established, of which nine resulted in the birth of an unaffected child, and the rest are ongoing.

conclusionsA high accuracy of preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single-gene disorders is achieved by application of sequential analysis of the first and second polar body and multiplex polymerase chain reaction.

Indexed as

AllelesPreimplantation DiagnosisCystic FibrosisFemaleGaucher DiseaseGenetic Diseases, InbornHumansOocytesPolymerase Chain ReactionPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID10224562
PMCPMC3455765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.