ArticleScientific reports2019
Copy Number Variations in a Cohort of 420 Individuals with Neurodevelopmental Disorders From the South of Brazil.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic and clinical utility of exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with GDD/iD: a meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Genotype-phenotype associations in microtia: a systematic review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Diversity of molecular karyotypes of 234 pediatric patients with autism spectrum disorder in chromosomal microarray analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Prenatal SNP-array chromosomal microarray analysis in 3,549 pregnancies: indication-specific yields and clinical implications.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Application of Chromosomal Karyotype Analysis Combined With Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in the Amniotic Fluid of Advanced Maternal Age.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- DNA copy number variations and craniofacial abnormalities in 1,457 children with neurodevelopmental disorders.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Clinical and Genetic Characteristics of Patients with Unexplained Intellectual Disability/Developmental Delay without Epilepsy.Molecular syndromology · 2023Article
- Construction of copy number variation landscape and characterization of associated genes in a Bangladeshi cohort of neurodevelopmental disorders.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Copy number variation analysis in 189 Romanian patients with global developmental delay/intellectual disability.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2022Article
- Pathogenic Copy Number Variations Involved in the Genetic Etiology of Syndromic and Non-Syndromic Intellectual Disability-Data from a Romanian Cohort.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical evaluation of rare copy number variations identified by chromosomal microarray in a Hungarian neurodevelopmental disorder patient cohort.Molecular cytogenetics · 2022Article
- Chromosomal microarray analyses from 5778 patients with neurodevelopmental disorders and congenital anomalies in Brazil.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- CNest: A novel copy number association discovery method uncovers 862 new associations from 200,629 whole-exome sequence datasets in the UK Biobank.Cell genomics · 2022Article
- Article
- Implementation of chromosomal microarrays in a cohort of patients with intellectual disability at the Argentinean public health system.Molecular biology reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chromosomal microarray (CMA) is now recommended as first tier for the evaluation in individuals with unexplained neurodevelopmental disorders (ND). However, in developing countries such as Brazil, classical cytogenetic tests are still the most used in clinical practice, as reflected by the scarcity of publications of microarray investigation in larger cohorts. This is a retrospective study which analyses the reading files of CMA and available clinical data from 420 patients from the south of Brazil, mostly children, with neurodevelopmental disorders requested by medical geneticists and neurologists for diagnostic purpose. Previous karyotyping was reported for 138 and includes 17 with abnormal results. The platforms used for CMA were CYTOSCAN 750K (75%) and CYTOSCAN HD (25%). The sex ratio of the patients was 1.625 males :1 female and the mean age was 9.5 years. A total of 96 pathogenic copy number variations (CNVs), 58 deletions and 38 duplications, were found in 18% of the patients and in all chromosomes, except chromosome 11. For 12% of the patients only variants of uncertain clinical significance were found. No clinically relevant CNV was found in 70%. The main referrals for chromosomal microarrays (CMA) were developmental delay (DD), intellectual disability (ID), facial dysmorphism and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). DD/ID were present in 80%, facial dysmorphism in 52% and ASD in 32%. Some phenotypes in this population could be predictive of a higher probability to carry a pathogenic CNV, as follows: dysmorphic facial features (p-value = < 0.0001, OR = 0.32), obesity (p-value = 0.006, OR = 0.20), short stature (p-value = 0.032, OR = 0.44), genitourinary anomalies (p-value = 0.032, OR = 0.63) and ASD (p-value = 0.039, OR = 1.94). The diagnostic rate for CMA in this study was 18%. We present the largest report of CMA data in a cohort with ND in Brazil. We characterize the rare CNVs found together with the main phenotypes presented by each patient, list phenotypes which could predict a higher diagnostic probability by CMA in patients with a neurodevelopmental disorder and show how CMA and classical karyotyping results are complementary.
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.