Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29573570›Full record

ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2018

A rapid and reliable chromosome analysis method for products of conception using interphase nuclei.

Ramesh Babu, Daniel L Van Dyke, Saurabh Bhattacharya, Vaithilingam G Dev, Mingya Liu, Minjae Kwon, Guangyu Gu, Prasad Koduru, Nagesh Rao, Cynthia Williamson and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2018. 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
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ramesh BabuDepartment of Research and Development, InteGen LLC, Orlando, FL, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5442-4042
Daniel L Van DykeDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Saurabh BhattacharyaDepartments of Cytogenetics and Administration, Dr. Lal PathLabs Ltd., New Delhi, India.
Vaithilingam G DevDepartment of Clinical Cytogenetics, Genetics Associates Inc., Nashville, TN, USA.
Mingya LiuDepartment of Clinical Cytogenetics, Genetics Associates Inc., Nashville, TN, USA.
Minjae KwonDepartment of Clinical Cytogenetics, Genetics Associates Inc., Nashville, TN, USA.
Guangyu GuDepartment of Clinical Cytogenetics, Genetics Associates Inc., Nashville, TN, USA.
Prasad KoduruDepartment of Pathology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Nagesh RaoDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, David Geffen UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Cynthia WilliamsonDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Ernesto FuentesDepartment of Research and Development, InteGen LLC, Orlando, FL, USA.
Sarah FuentesDepartment of Research and Development, InteGen LLC, Orlando, FL, USA.
Stephen PapaDepartment of Research and Development, InteGen LLC, Orlando, FL, USA.
Srikanthi KopuriDepartment of Research and Development, InteGen LLC, Orlando, FL, USA.
Vandana LalDr. Lal PathLabs Ltd., New Delhi, India.
Insight Genetics (United States) · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USSouthwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKaryotype determination has a central role in the genetic workup of pregnancy loss, as aneuploidy (trisomy and monosomy) and polyploidy (triploidy and tetraploidy) are the cause in at least 50% of first trimester, 25% of second trimester, and 11% of third trimester miscarriages. There are several limitations with the current approaches of obtaining a karyotype using traditional cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization with a limited number of probes, and chromosomal microarray. These include culture failure, incomplete results, lower sensitivity, and longer reporting time.

methodsTo overcome current limitations, a novel molecular assay is developed with a Standard Resolution Interphase Chromosome Profiling probe set which is a variation of the recently developed High Resolution probe set. It generates a molecular karyotype that can detect all major changes commonly associated with pregnancy loss. Initial familiarization of signal patterns from the probe set was used, followed by validation of the method using 83 samples from miscarriages in a blind study from three different laboratories. Finally, the clinical utility of the method was tested on 291 clinical samples in two commercial reference laboratory settings on two different continents.

resultsThe new molecular approach not only identified all the chromosome changes observed by current methods, but also significantly improved abnormality detection by characterizing derivative chromosomes and finding subtle subtelomeric rearrangements, balanced and unbalanced. All Robertsonian translocations were also detected. The abnormality rate was 54% on clinical samples from commercial laboratory 1 and 63% from laboratory 2.

conclusionThe attributes of this method make it an ideal choice for the genetic workup of miscarriages, namely (1) near 100% successful results, (2) greater sensitivity than conventional chromosome analysis or FISH panels, (3) rapid reporting time, and (4) favorable comparisons with chromosomal microarray.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousChromosome AberrationsCytogenetic AnalysisCytogeneticsFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceInterphaseKaryotypeKaryotypingMonosomyPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisSensitivity and SpecificityTetrasomyTrisomyabortionfluorescencein situ hybridizationkaryotypespontaneous

Identifiers

PMID29573570
PMCPMC6014463
OpenAlexW2793083815

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.