ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2023
Prenatal diagnosis of mosaic chromosomal aneuploidy and uniparental disomy and clinical outcomes evaluation of four fetuses.
Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew co-occurrence cases of mosaic aneuploidy and uniparental disomy (UPD) chromosomes have been reported in prenatal periods. It is a big challenge for us to predict fetal clinical outcomes with these chromosome abnormalities because of their highly heterogeneous clinical manifestations and limited phenotype attainable by ultrasound.
methodsAmniotic fluid samples were collected from four cases. Karyotype, chromosome microarray analysis, short tandem repeats, and whole exome sequencing were adopted to analyze fetal chromosomal aneuploidy, UPD, and gene variation. Meanwhile, CNVseq analysis proceeded for cultured and uncultured amniocytes in case 2 and case 4 and MS-MLPA for chr11 and chr15 in case 3.
resultsAll four fetuses showed mosaic chromosomal aneuploidy and UPD simultaneously. The results were: Case 1: T2(7%) and UPD(2)mat(12%). Case 2: T15(60%) and UPD(15)mat(40%). Case 3: 45,X(13%) and genome-wide paternal UPD(20%). Case 4: <10% of T20 and > 90% UPD(20)mat in uncultured amniocyte. By analyzing their formation mechanism of mosaic chromosomal aneuploidy and UPD, at least two adverse genetic events happened during their meiosis and mitosis. The fetus of case 1 presented a benign with a normal intrauterine phenotype, consistent with a low proportion of trisomy cells. However, the other three fetuses had adverse pregnancy outcomes, resulting from the UPD chromosomes with imprinted regions involved or a higher level of mosaic aneuploidy.
conclusionUPD is often present with mosaic aneuploidy. It is necessary to analyze them simultaneously using a whole battery of analyses for these cases when their chromosomes with imprinted regions are involved or known carriers of a recessive allele. Fetal clinical outcomes were related to the affected chromosomes aneuploidy and UPD, mosaic levels and tissues, methylation status, and homozygous variation of recessive genes on the UPD chromosome. Genetic counseling for pregnant women with such fetuses is crucial to make informed choices.
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.