Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30524505›Full record

ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2018

The application of NIPT using combinatorial probe-anchor synthesis to identify sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCAs) in a cohort of 570 pregnancies.

Hongge Li, Yu Lei, Hui Zhu, Yuqin Luo, Yeqing Qian, Min Chen, Yixi Sun, Kai Yan, Yanmei Yang, Bei Liu and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hongge Li1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yu Lei1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Hui Zhu1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yuqin Luo1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yeqing Qian1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Min Chen1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yixi Sun1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Kai Yan1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yanmei Yang1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Bei Liu1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Liya Wang1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Yingzhi Huang1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Junjie Hu1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Jianyun Xu1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.
Minyue Dong1Women's Hospital, School of Medicine Zhejiang University, 1, Xueshi Road, Hangzhou Zhejiang, 310006 People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-4344-7924
Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University · CNMinistry of Education · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as alternative screening method had been proven to have very high sensitivity and specificity for detecting common aneuploidies such as T21, T18, and T13, with low false positive and false negative rates. Unfortunately, recent studies suggested that the NIPT achieved lower accuracy in sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCAs) detection than autosomal aneuploidies detection. BGISEQ-500 powered by Combinatorial Probe-Anchor Synthesis (CPAS) and DNA Nanoballs (DNBs) technology that combined linear amplification and rolling circle replication to reduce the error rate while enhancing the signal. Therefore, NIPT based on CPAS might be a good method for SCAs screening in routine clinical practice. In the study, we intended to evaluate the clinical utility of NIPT based on CPAS on screening for fetal SCAs.

resultsA total of 570 pregnant women were included in the retrospective study. Maternal blood samples were collected for NIPT; amniocentesis was performed on all pregnant women. NIPT was carried out by BGISEQ-500 sequencing platform based on CPAS. Karyotype analysis of amniotic cells was performed by standard G-banding techniques. 43 out of the total 570 pregnant women tested by NIPT showed fetal SCAs (19 of 45,X, 12 of 47,XXY, 10 of 47,XXX, and 2 of 47,XYY). The following amniocentesis confirmed that 26 cases were true positive (7 of true positive 45,X, 9 of true positive 47,XXY, 9 of true positive 47,XXX as well as 1 of 47,XYY) and the positive predictive value (PPV) for fetal SCAs was 60.47%. In addition, the PPV of advanced maternal age group (67.74%) was higher than the other indications group (45.45%) or serological screening high-risk /critical-risk group (0%).

conclusionsNIPT based on CPAS could be a potential method for SCAs screening. However, it still had high false positive rates, especially for 45,X. The pregnant women with fetal SCAs detected by NIPT, especially those with non-age-related prenatal diagnostic indications, should be advised to accept invasive prenatal karyotype analysis.

Indexed as

Combinatorial probe-anchor synthesis (CPAS)Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)Sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCAs)

Identifiers

PMID30524505
PMCPMC6278040
OpenAlexW2902241147

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.