Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33799648›Full record

ReviewGenes2021

Optical Genome Mapping as a Next-Generation Cytogenomic Tool for Detection of Structural and Copy Number Variations for Prenatal Genomic Analyses.

Nikhil Shri Sahajpal, Hayk Barseghyan, Ravindra Kolhe, Alex Hastie, Alka Chaubey

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
34.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Detection of a complex chromosomal rearrangement in a novel mouse mutant by optical genome mapping.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Unveiling genomic rearrangements in engineered iPSC lines by optical genome mapping.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nikhil Shri SahajpalDepartment of Pathology, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.
Hayk BarseghyanCenter for Genetic Medicine Research, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC 20010, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0507-2532
Ravindra KolheDepartment of Pathology, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8283-2403
Alex HastieBionano Genomics Inc., San Diego, CA 92121, USA.
Alka ChaubeyDepartment of Pathology, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.
Augusta University · USBioNano Genomics (United States) · USChildren's National · US

Funding

Disorders/Differences of Sex Development (DSD) - Translational Research NetworkR01HD093450 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI SANDBERG, DAVID ERIC, VILAIN, ERIC J. · 2018 to 2022
$3.9M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD093450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Global medical associations (ACOG, ISUOG, ACMG) recommend diagnostic prenatal testing for the detection and prevention of genetic disorders. Historically, cytogenetic methods such as karyotype analysis, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and chromosomal microarray (CMA) are utilized worldwide to diagnose common syndromes. However, the limitations of each of these methods, either performed in tandem or simultaneously, demonstrates the need of a revolutionary technology that can alleviate the need for multiple technologies. Optical genome mapping (OGM) is a novel method that fills this void by being able to detect all classes of structural variations (SVs), including copy number variations (CNVs). OGM is being adopted by laboratories as a tool for both postnatal constitutional genetic disorders and hematological malignancies. This commentary highlights the potential for OGM to become a standard of care in prenatal genetic testing based on its capability to comprehensively identify large balanced and unbalanced SVs (currently the strength of karyotyping and metaphase FISH), CNVs (by CMA), repeat contraction disorders (by Southern blotting) and multiple repeat expansion disorders (by PCR-based methods or Southern blotting). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods are excellent at detecting sequence variants, but they are unable to accurately resolve repeat regions of the genome, which limits their ability to detect all classes of SVs. Notably, multiple molecular methods are used to identify repeat expansion and contraction disorders in routine clinical laboratories around the world. With non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) becoming the standard of care screening assay for all global pregnancies, we anticipate that OGM can provide a high-resolution, cytogenomic assay to be employed following a positive NIPT screen or for high-risk pregnancies with an abnormal ultrasound. Accurate detection of all types of genetic disorders by OGM, such as liveborn aneuploidies, sex chromosome anomalies, microdeletion/microduplication syndromes, repeat expansion/contraction disorders is key to reducing the global burden of genetic disorders.

Indexed as

AneuploidyChromosome DisordersDNA Copy Number VariationsGenomicsOptogeneticsPrenatal DiagnosisFemaleHumansPregnancyaneuploidieschromosomal aberrationscopy number variationcytogeneticscytogenomicsOGMoptical genome mappingprenatal genetic testingstructural variation

Identifiers

PMID33799648
PMCPMC8001299
OpenAlexW3129925170

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.