Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34358384›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2022

Clinical experience with non-invasive prenatal screening for single-gene disorders.

P Mohan, J Lemoine, C Trotter, I Rakova, P Billings, S Peacock, C-Y Kao, Y Wang, F Xia, C M Eng and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.7field-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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Identification of maternalAnnals of medicine · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

P MohanNatera, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA.
J LemoineNatera, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA.
C TrotterNatera, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA.
I RakovaNatera, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA.
P BillingsNatera, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA.
S PeacockBaylor Genetics, Houston, TX, USA.
C-Y KaoBaylor Genetics, Houston, TX, USA.
Y WangBaylor Genetics, Houston, TX, USA.
F XiaBaylor Genetics, Houston, TX, USA.
C M EngBaylor Genetics, Houston, TX, USA.
P BennDepartment of Genetics and Genome Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7917-6946
Natera (United States) · USBaylor College of Medicine · USBaylor Genetics · USUConn Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the performance of a non-invasive prenatal screening test (NIPT) for a panel of dominant single-gene disorders (SGD) with a combined population incidence of 1 in 600.

methodsCell-free fetal DNA isolated from maternal plasma samples accessioned from 14 April 2017 to 27 November 2019 was analyzed by next-generation sequencing, targeting 30 genes, to look for pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants implicated in 25 dominant conditions. The conditions included Noonan spectrum disorders, skeletal disorders, craniosynostosis syndromes, Cornelia de Lange syndrome, Alagille syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, epileptic encephalopathy, SYNGAP1-related intellectual disability, CHARGE syndrome, Sotos syndrome and Rett syndrome. NIPT-SGD was made available as a clinical service to women with a singleton pregnancy at ≥ 9 weeks' gestation, with testing on maternal and paternal genomic DNA to assist in interpretation. A minimum of 4.5% fetal fraction was required for test interpretation. Variants identified in the mother were deemed inconclusive with respect to fetal carrier status. Confirmatory prenatal or postnatal diagnostic testing was recommended for all screen-positive patients and follow-up information was requested. The screen-positive rates with respect to the clinical indication for testing were evaluated.

resultsA NIPT-SGD result was available for 2208 women, of which 125 (5.7%) were positive. Elevated test-positive rates were observed for referrals with a family history of a disorder on the panel (20/132 (15.2%)) or a primary indication of fetal long-bone abnormality (60/178 (33.7%)), fetal craniofacial abnormality (6/21 (28.6%)), fetal lymphatic abnormality (20/150 (13.3%)) or major fetal cardiac defect (4/31 (12.9%)). For paternal age ≥ 40 years as a sole risk factor, the test-positive rate was 2/912 (0.2%). Of the 125 positive cases, follow-up information was available for 67 (53.6%), with none classified as false-positive. No false-negative cases were identified.

conclusionsNIPT can assist in the early detection of a set of SGD, particularly when either abnormal ultrasound findings or a family history is present. Additional clinical studies are needed to evaluate the optimal design of the gene panel, define target populations and assess patient acceptability. NIPT-SGD offers a safe and early prenatal screening option. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingAdultCell-Free Nucleic AcidsFemaleFetusGenetic Diseases, InbornGestational AgeHumansNoninvasive Prenatal TestingPregnancyCell-Free Nucleic Acidsautosomal dominant disordercell-free DNAnext-generation sequencingnon-invasive prenatal testingNoonan spectrum disordersingle-gene disorder

Identifiers

PMID34358384
PMCPMC9302116
OpenAlexW3192281618

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.