ArticlePloS one2017
Comparative evaluation of the Minimally-Invasive Karyotyping (MINK) algorithm for non-invasive prenatal testing.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Minimally Invasive Karyotyping (MINK) was communicated in 2009 as a novel method for the non-invasive detection of fetal copy number anomalies in maternal plasma DNA. The original manuscript illustrated the potential of MINK using a model system in which fragmented genomic DNA obtained from a trisomy 21 male individual was mixed with that of his karyotypically normal mother at dilutions representing fetal fractions found in maternal plasma. Although it has been previously shown that MINK is able to non-invasively detect fetal microdeletions, its utility for aneuploidy detection in maternal plasma has not previously been demonstrated. The current study illustrates the ability of MINK to detect common aneuploidy in early gestation, compares its performance to other published third party methods (and related software packages) for prenatal aneuploidy detection and evaluates the performance of these methods across a range of sequencing read inputs. Plasma samples were obtained from 416 pregnant women between gestational weeks 8.1 and 34.4. Shotgun DNA sequencing was performed and data analyzed using MINK RAPIDR and WISECONDOR. MINK performed with greater accuracy than RAPIDR and WISECONDOR, correctly identifying 60 out of 61 true trisomy cases, and reporting only one false positive in 355 normal pregnancies. Significantly, MINK achieved accurate detection of trisomy 21 using just 2 million aligned input reads, whereas WISECONDOR required 6 million reads and RAPIDR did not achieve complete accuracy at any read input tested. In conclusion, we demonstrate that MINK provides an analysis pipeline for the detection of fetal aneuploidy in samples of maternal plasma DNA.
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.