Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29238403›Full record

ReviewMolecular cytogenetics2017

Mosaicism for structural non-centromeric autosomal rearrangement in prenatal diagnoses: evidence for sex-specific selection against chromosomal abnormalities.

Natalia V Kovaleva, Philip D Cotter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular cytogenetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

2 authors.

Natalia V KovalevaAcademy of Molecular Medicine, Mytniskaya str. 12/44, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
Philip D CotterDepartment of Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMosaicism for chromosome rearrangements is common in preimplantation diagnoses, yet is rare in prenatal diagnoses as well as in other groups of patients referred to cytogenetic testing. Consequently, there is a lack of detailed studies on this kind of mosaicism in all groups of patients. Previous reports have identified a deficit of males among asymptomatic carriers of N/unbalanced Rea. Three mechanisms were proposed for explaining this phenomenon, including a high instability in the early female embryonic development, a male-specific selection against abnormal cells in the early embryo development, or a high intrauterine lethality of male carriers. To address these possibilities, we have performed a meta-analysis of male-to-female ratio (sex ratio, SR) in prenatally diagnosed and in spontaneously aborted carriers of mosaic Rea.

resultsOne hundred and twenty one prenatally detected cases of normal cell line/autosome rearrangement mosaicism (N/Rea) with known carriers' sex were identified from the literature. Carriers of N/unbalanced Rea presented with 38 abnormal and 28 normal/apparently normal outcomes while carriers of N/balanced Rea presented with 24 normal and 3 abnormal outcomes. 58% of carriers of N/unbalanced Rea with an abnormal outcome displayed a high proportion (> 50%) of amniocytes with the abnormality compared to 25% of carriers with normal/apparently normal outcome. More female carriers of N/unbalanced Rea were identified with an abnormal outcome (15 M/23F) in contrast to a notable male predominance (18 M/10F) among those with normal outcome

conclusionPrevious reports have identified a deficit of male among asymptomatic carriers of N/unbalanced Rea. The current data suggests a male-specific selection against chromosomal abnormalities.

Indexed as

Genomic imbalanceMaternal ageNon-centromeric autosomal rearrangementPaternal ageSegmental somatic mosaicismSex ratio

Identifiers

PMID29238403
PMCPMC5725842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.