Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38297236›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Clinical evaluation of noninvasive prenatal testing for sex chromosome aneuploidies in 9,176 Korean pregnant women: a single-center retrospective study.

Hyunjin Kim, Ji Eun Park, Kyung Min Kang, Hee Yeon Jang, Minyeon Go, So Hyun Yang, Jong Chul Kim, Seo Young Lim, Dong Hyun Cha, Jungah Choi and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hyunjin KimCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Ji Eun ParkCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Kyung Min KangCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Hee Yeon JangCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Minyeon GoCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
So Hyun YangCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Jong Chul KimCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Seo Young LimDepartment of Biomedical Science, College of Life Science, CHA University, Seongnam, 13488, Republic of Korea.
Dong Hyun ChaCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea.
Jungah ChoiCollege of Liberal Art, CHA University, Pocheon, Gyeonggi, Republic of Korea. jungah.choi@cha.ac.kr.
Sung Han ShimCenter for Genome Diagnostics, CHA Biotech Inc, Seoul, 06125, Republic of Korea. shshim@cha.ac.kr.
CHA University · KR490 BioTech (United States) · US

Funding

Korea Health Technology R&D Project funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare HI21C1552National Research Foundation of Korea NRF2019R1A6A1A0303288821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the clinical significance of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for detecting fetal sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) in Korean pregnant women.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed NIPT data from 9,176 women with singleton pregnancies referred to the CHA Biotech genome diagnostics center. Cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) was extracted from maternal peripheral blood, and high-throughput massively parallel sequencing was conducted. Subsequently, the positive NIPT results for SCA were validated via karyotype and chromosomal microarray analyses.

resultsOverall, 46 cases were SCA positive after NIPT, including 20, 12, 8, and 6 for Turner, triple X, Klinefelter, and Jacob syndromes, respectively. Among 37 women with invasive prenatal diagnosis, 19 had true positive NIPT results. The overall positive predictive value (PPV) of NIPT for detecting SCAs was 51.35%. The PPV was 18.75% for Turner, 88.89% for triple X, 71.43% for Klinefelter, and 60.00% for Jacob's syndromes. NIPT accuracy for detecting sex chromosome trisomies was higher than that for sex chromosome monosomy (P = 0.002). No significant correlation was observed between fetal SCA incidence and maternal age (P = 0.914), except for the borderline significance of Jacob's syndrome (P = 0.048). No significant differences were observed when comparing NIPT and karyotyping validation for fetal SCA according to pregnancy characteristics.

conclusionOur data suggest that NIPT can reliably screen for SCAs, and it performed better in predicting sex chromosome trisomies compared with monosomy X. No correlation was observed between maternal age and fetal SCA incidence, and no association was observed between different pregnancy characteristics. The accuracy of these findings requires improvements; however, our study provides an important reference for clinical genetic counseling and further management. Larger scale studies, considering confounding factors, are required for accurate evaluation.

Indexed as

Noninvasive Prenatal TestingSex Chromosome DisordersTrisomyXYY KaryotypeAneuploidyFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnant PeoplePrenatal DiagnosisRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesSex Chromosome AberrationsSex ChromosomesGenetic counselingNoninvasive prenatal testingPositive predictive valuePrenatal diagnosisSex chromosome aneuploidies

Identifiers

PMID38297236
PMCPMC10829263
OpenAlexW4391387662

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.