ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2018
A foetus with 18p11.32-q21.2 duplication and Xp22.33-p11.1 deletion derived from a maternal reciprocal translocation t(X;18)(q13;q21.3).
Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inherited unbalanced reciprocal translocation with 3q duplication and 5p deletion in a foetus revealed by cell-free foetal DNA (cffDNA) testing: a case report.European journal of medical research · 2021Article
- The genetic cause of intellectual deficiency and/or congenital malformations in two parental reciprocal translocation carriers and implications for assisted reproduction.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Fetus of 8q22.2q24.3 duplication and 13q33.2q34 deletion derived from a maternal balanced translocation.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2020Article
- Detection of 21q11.2-q22.11 deletions in a fetus by NIPT.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) evaluates circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and has been widely applied, with highly accurate results for detecting foetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13. Recently, increasing attention has been paid to the clinical application of the non-invasive detection of foetal sub-chromosomal duplications and deletions beyond common aneuploidies. CASE PRESENTATION: A 32-year-old healthy pregnant woman was referred to the Medical Genetic Centre of Ganzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. As routine practice, ultrasound examination at a gestational age of 16 weeks showed that the foetus is normal. To avoid invasive prenatal diagnosis procedures, an NIPT was offered to further screen for common foetal chromosomal abnormalities. The result showed that there was an approximately 50.94 Mb duplication in p11.32-q21.2 of chromosome 18 and an approximately 58.46 Mb deletion in p22.33-p11.1 of chromosome X. In addition, the chromosome karyotypes of the parents and foetus were also analysed. Chromosome karyotype analysis results showed that foetal karyotype was 46,X,der(18), the maternal karyotype was 46,XX,t(X;18)(q13;q21.3), and the paternal karyotype revealed no obvious abnormality.
conclusionIn this case, we successfully detected a healthy pregnant woman with balanced translocation X;18(q13;q21.3) and described the foetal karyotype as 46,X,der(18)t(X;18)(q11;q21.1)mat. Our report illustrated these cases which present complex X;autosome balance translocation and X;autosome unbalance translocation which may contribute to severe clinical phenotypes. In addition, our report also proved that the interruption of genes in the Xq critical region is not only reason of primary infertility. Finally, we prompted that NIPT might play a role in the first trimester screening of sub-chromosomal rearrangement.
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.