Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34982160›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Feasibility of Screening for Chromosome 15 Imprinting Disorders in 16 579 Newborns by Using a Novel Genomic Workflow.

David E Godler, Ling Ling, Dinusha Gamage, Emma K Baker, Minh Bui, Michael J Field, Carolyn Rogers, Merlin G Butler, Alessandra Murgia, Emanuela Leonardi and 12 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Genomic Screening Consortium for Australian Newborns (GenSCAN).Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Multi-Omic Approach to Newborn Screening: Opportunities and Challenges.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Age of diagnosis for children with chromosome 15q syndromes.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A case for newborn screening for pyridoxine-dependent epilepsy.Cold Spring Harbor molecular case studies · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

22 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

David E GodlerDiagnosis and Development, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Ling LingDiagnosis and Development, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Dinusha GamageDiagnosis and Development, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Emma K BakerDiagnosis and Development, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Minh BuiCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Michael J FieldGenetics of Learning Disability Service, Hunter Genetics, Waratah, New South Wales, Australia.
Carolyn RogersGenetics of Learning Disability Service, Hunter Genetics, Waratah, New South Wales, Australia.
Merlin G ButlerDepartments of Psychiatry, Behavioral Sciences and Pediatrics, University of Kansas Medical Centre, Kansas City, Kansas.
Alessandra MurgiaMolecular Genetics of Neurodevelopment, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Emanuela LeonardiMolecular Genetics of Neurodevelopment, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Roberta PolliMolecular Genetics of Neurodevelopment, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Charles E SchwartzCenter for Molecular Studies, J.C. Self Research Institute of Human Genetics, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
Cindy D SkinnerCenter for Molecular Studies, J.C. Self Research Institute of Human Genetics, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
Angelica M AlliendeCytogenetics and Molecular Laboratory, Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Lorena Santa MariaCytogenetics and Molecular Laboratory, Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
James PittVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ronda GreavesFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
David FrancisVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ralph OertelVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Min WangTranslational Bioinformatics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Cas SimonsTranslational Bioinformatics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
David J AmorFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Murdoch Children's Research Institute · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUCittà della Speranza Foundation · ITGreenwood Genetic Center · USHunter Genetics · AUUniversity of Chile · CLUniversity of Kansas Medical Center · USUniversity of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Newborn screening for Angelman syndrome (AS), Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS), and chromosome 15 duplication syndrome (Dup15q) may lead to benefit from early diagnosis and treatment. Objective: To examine the feasibility of newborn screening for these chromosome 15 imprinting disorders at population scale. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this diagnostic study, the validation data set for the first-tier SNRPN test, called methylation-specific quantitative melt analysis (MS-QMA), included 109 PWS, 48 AS, 9 Dup15q, and 1190 population control newborn blood spots (NBS) and peripheral tissue samples from participants recruited from January 2000 to December 2016. The test data set included NBS samples from 16 579 infants born in 2011. Infants with an NBS identified as positive for PWS, AS, or Dup15q by the first-tier test were referred for droplet digital polymerase chain reaction, real-time polymerase chain reaction, and low-coverage whole-genome sequencing for confirmatory testing. Data analyses were conducted between February 12, 2015, and August 15, 2020. Results: In the validation data set, the median age for the 77 patients with PWS was 3.00 years (IQR, 0.01-44.50 years); for the 46 patients with AS, 2.76 years (IQR, 0.028 to 49.00 years); and for the 9 patients with Dup15q, 4.00 years (IQR, 1.00 to 28.00 years). Thirty-eight patients (51.4%) in the PWS group, 20 patients (45.5%) in the AS group, and 6 patients (66.7%) in the Dup15q group who had sex reported were male. The validation data set showed MS-QMA sensitivity of 99.0% for PWS, 93.8% for AS, and 77.8% for Dup15q; specificity of 100% for PWS, AS, and Dup15q; positive predictive and negative predictive values of 100% for PWS and AS; and a positive predictive value of 87.5% and negative predictive value of 100% for Dup15q. In the test data set of NBS samples from 16 579 infants, 92 had a positive test result using a methylation ratio cut-off of 3 standard deviations from the mean. Of these patients, 2 were confirmed to have PWS; 2, AS; and 1, maternal Dup15q. With the use of more conservative PWS- and AS-specific thresholds for positive calls from the validation data set, 9 positive NBS results were identified by MS-QMA in this cohort. The 2 PWS and 2 AS calls were confirmed by second-tier testing, but the 1 Dup15q case was not confirmed. Together, these results provided prevalence estimates of 1 in 8290 for both AS and PWS and 1 in 16 579 for maternal Dup15q, with positive predictive values for first-tier testing at 67.0% for AS, 33.0% for PWS, and 44.0% for combined detection of chromosome 15 imprinting disorders for the validation data set. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this diagnostic study suggest that it is feasible to screen for all chromosome 15 imprinting disorders using SNRPN methylation analysis, with 5 individuals identified with these disorders out of 16 579 infants screened.

Indexed as

Angelman SyndromePrader-Willi SyndromeAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolChromosome DuplicationChromosomes, Human, Pair 15DNA MethylationFeasibility StudiesFemaleGenetic TestingHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMale

Identifiers

PMID34982160
PMCPMC8728620
OpenAlexW4206690503

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.