ArticleGenetic testing and molecular biomarkers2016
Carrier Screening is a Deficient Strategy for Determining Sperm Donor Eligibility and Reducing Risk of Disease in Recipient Children.
Article in Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Israeli students' perceptions regarding sperm donation: dilemmas reflections with dominant demographic effect.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Genetic testing of sperm donors in China: a survey of current practices.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Probability of high-risk genetic matching with oocyte and semen donors: complete gene analysis or genotyping test?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Observational
- Maintaining an adequate sperm donor pool: modifying the medical criteria for sperm donor selection.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- The use of expanded carrier screening of gamete donors.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2021Review
- Public Views on Genetics and Genetic Testing: A Survey of the General Public in Belgium.Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDNA-based carrier screening is a standard component of donor eligibility protocols practiced by U.S. sperm banks. Applicants who test positive for carrying a recessive disease mutation are typically disqualified. The aim of our study was to examine the utility of a range of screening panels adopted by the industry and the effectiveness of the screening paradigm in reducing a future child's risk of inheriting disease.
methodsA cohort of 27 donor applicants, who tested negative on an initial cystic fibrosis carrier test, was further screened with three expanded commercial carrier testing panels. These results were then compared to a systematic analysis of the applicants' DNA using next-generation sequencing (NGS) data.
resultsThe carrier panels detected serious pediatric disease mutations in one, four, or six donor applicants. Because each panel screens distinct regions of the genome, no single donor was uniformly identified as carrier positive by all three panels. In contrast, systematic NGS analysis identified all donors as carriers of one or more mutations associated with severe monogenic pediatric disease. These included 30 variants classified as "pathogenic" based on clinical observation and 66 with a high likelihood of causing gene dysfunction.
conclusionDespite tremendous advances in variant identification, understanding, and analysis, the vast majority of disease-causing mutation combinations remain undetected by commercial carrier screening panels, which cover a narrow, and often distinct, subset of genes and mutations. The biological reality is that all donors and recipients carry serious recessive disease mutations. This challenges the utility of any screening protocol that anchors donor eligibility to carrier status. A more effective approach to reducing recessive disease risk would consider joint comprehensive analysis of both donor and recipient disease mutations. This type of high-resolution recessive disease risk analysis is now available and affordable, but industry practice must be modified to incorporate its use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.