Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259418›Full record

ReviewReproductive medicine and biology2016

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening by comprehensive molecular testing.

Hiroki Kurahashi, Takema Kato, Jun Miyazaki, Haruki Nishizawa, Eiji Nishio, Hiroshi Furukawa, Hironori Miyamura, Mayuko Ito, Toshiaki Endo, Yuya Ouchi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproductive medicine and biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Hiroki KurahashiDivision of Molecular Genetics, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science Fujita Health University 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Takema KatoDivision of Molecular Genetics, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science Fujita Health University 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Jun MiyazakiDivision of Molecular Genetics, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science Fujita Health University 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Haruki NishizawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fujita Health University School of Medicine 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Eiji NishioDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fujita Health University School of Medicine 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Hiroshi FurukawaDepartment of Laboratory Medicine Fujita Health University Hospital 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Hironori MiyamuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fujita Health University School of Medicine 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Mayuko ItoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fujita Health University School of Medicine 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Toshiaki EndoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Sapporo Medical University 060-8543 Sapporo Hokkaido Japan.
Yuya OuchiGenome and Transcriptome Analysis Center Fujita Health University 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Hidehito InagakiDivision of Molecular Genetics, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science Fujita Health University 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Takuma FujiiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fujita Health University School of Medicine 470-1192 Toyoake Aichi Japan.
Fujita Health University · JPFujita Health University Hospital · JPSapporo Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although embryo screening by preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has become the standard technique for the treatment of recurrent pregnancy loss in couples with a balanced gross chromosomal rearrangement, the implantation and pregnancy rates of PGD using conventional fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) remain suboptimal. Comprehensive molecular testing, such as array comparative genomic hybridization and next-generation sequencing, can improve these rates, but amplification bias in the whole genome amplification method remains an obstacle to accurate diagnosis. Recent advances in amplification procedures combined with improvements in the microarray platform and analytical method have overcome the amplification bias, and the data accuracy of the comprehensive PGD method has reached the level of clinical laboratory testing. Currently, comprehensive PGD is also applied to recurrent pregnancy loss due to recurrent fetal aneuploidy or infertility with recurrent implantation failure, known as preimplantation genetic screening. However, there are still numerous problems to be solved, including misdiagnosis due to somatic mosaicism, cell cycle-related background noise, and difficulty in diagnosis of polyploidy. The technology for comprehensive PGD also requires further improvement.

Indexed as

MicroarrayNext‐generation sequencingPreimplantation genetic diagnosisRecurrent pregnancy lossTranslocation

Identifiers

PMID29259418
PMCPMC5715840
OpenAlexW2257322841

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.