Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26328504›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2016

Prenatal SNP array testing in 1000 fetuses with ultrasound anomalies: causative, unexpected and susceptibility CNVs.

Malgorzata I Srebniak, Karin Em Diderich, Marieke Joosten, Lutgarde Cp Govaerts, Jeroen Knijnenburg, Femke At de Vries, Marjan Boter, Debora Lont, Maarten Fcm Knapen, Merel C de Wit and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Application of exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis: a rapid scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020
    Article
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

13 authors.

Malgorzata I SrebniakDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Karin Em DiderichDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marieke JoostenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Lutgarde Cp GovaertsDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jeroen KnijnenburgDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke At de VriesDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marjan BoterDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Debora LontDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten Fcm KnapenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Merel C de WitDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Attie Tji GoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert-Jan H GaljaardDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Diane Van OpstalDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate the diagnostic value of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array testing in 1033 fetuses with ultrasound anomalies we investigated the prevalence and genetic nature of pathogenic findings. We reclassified all pathogenic findings into three categories: causative findings; unexpected diagnoses (UD); and susceptibility loci (SL) for neurodevelopmental disorders. After exclusion of trisomy 13, 18, 21, sex-chromosomal aneuploidy and triploidies, in 76/1033 (7.4%) fetuses a pathogenic chromosome abnormality was detected by genomic SNP array: in 19/1033 cases (1.8%) a microscopically detectable abnormality was found and in 57/1033 (5.5%) fetuses a pathogenic submicroscopic chromosome abnormality was detected. 58% (n=44) of all these pathogenic chromosome abnormalities involved a causative finding, 35% (n=27) a SL for neurodevelopmental disorder, and 6% (n=5) a UD of an early-onset untreatable disease. In 0.3% of parental samples an incidental pathogenic finding was encountered. Our results confirm that a genomic array should be the preferred first-tier technique in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies. All UDs involved early-onset diseases, which is beneficial for the patients to know. It also seems that UDs occur at a comparable frequency among microscopic and submicroscopic pathogenic findings. SL were more often detected than in pregnancies without ultrasound anomalies.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideAmniocentesisChromosome DisordersFemaleFetusGenetic TestingHumansIncidental FindingsOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPregnancyUltrasonography, Prenatal

Identifiers

PMID26328504
PMCPMC4930096

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.