ArticleThe journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society2017
Comparison of Spectrophotometry, Chromate Inhibition, and Cytofluorometry Versus Gene Sequencing for Detection of Heterozygously Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase-Deficient Females.
Article in The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Resolving haplotypes of the glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase gene using long-range polymerase chain reaction and Oxford Nanopore sequencing.Biology methods & protocols · 2026Article
- Single-Drop Blood Detection of CommonACS omega · 2023Article
- Korean clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis of hereditary hemolytic anemia.Blood research · 2022Review
- Molecular heterogeneity of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency in neonates in Wuhan: Description of four novel variants.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency-associated hemolysis and methemoglobinemia in a COVID-19 patient treated with chloroquine.American journal of hematology · 2020Article
- Protect, repair, destroy or sacrifice: a role of oxidative stress biology in inter-donor variability of blood storage?Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2019Review
- Prevalence and Genetic Characterization of Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency in Anemic Subjects from Uttar Pradesh, India.Journal of pediatric genetics · 2019Article
- Addressing the gender-knowledge gap in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: challenges and opportunities.International health · 2019Article
- Cytochemical flow analysis of intracellular G6PD and aggregate analysis of mosaic G6PD expression.European journal of haematology · 2018Article
- Point-of-Care Testing for G6PD Deficiency: Opportunities for Screening.International journal of neonatal screening · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is the most common enzyme deficiency worldwide. Detection of heterozygously deficient females can be difficult as residual activity in G6PD-sufficient red blood cells (RBCs) can mask deficiency. In this study, we compared accuracy of 4 methods for detection of G6PD deficiency in females. Blood samples from females more than 3 months of age were used for spectrophotometric measurement of G6PD activity and for determination of the percentage G6PD-negative RBCs by cytofluorometry. An additional sample from females suspected to have G6PD deficiency based on the spectrophotometric G6PD activity was used for measuring chromate inhibition and sequencing of the G6PD gene. Of 165 included females, 114 were suspected to have heterozygous deficiency. From 75 females, an extra sample was obtained. In this group, mutation analysis detected 27 heterozygously deficient females. The sensitivity of spectrophotometry, cytofluorometry, and chromate inhibition was calculated to be 0.52 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.71), 0.85 (CI: 0.66-0.96), and 0.96 (CI: 0.71-1.00, respectively, and the specificity was 1.00 (CI: 0.93-1.00), 0.88 (CI: 0.75-0.95), and 0.98 (CI: 0.89-1.00), respectively. Heterozygously G6PD-deficient females with a larger percentage of G6PD-sufficient RBCs are missed by routine methods measuring total G6PD activity. However, the majority of these females can be detected with both chromate inhibition and cytofluorometry.
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.