Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38577897›Full record

ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2024

Extending the new era of genomic testing into pregnancy management: A proposed model for Australian prenatal services.

Alice Rogers, Lucas De Jong, Wendy Waters, Lesley H Rawlings, Keryn Simons, Song Gao, Julien Soubrier, Rosalie Kenyon, Ming Lin, Rob King and 12 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
11.1field-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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The PreGen Research Program: Implementing Prenatal Genomic Testing in Australia-A Commentary.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025
    Article
  5. The Multi-Omic Approach to Newborn Screening: Opportunities and Challenges.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alice RogersPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lucas De JongTechnology Advancement Unit, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Wendy WatersGenetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lesley H RawlingsGenomics Unit, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Keryn SimonsGenomics Unit, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Song GaoTechnology Advancement Unit, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Julien SoubrierTechnology Advancement Unit, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Rosalie KenyonACRF SA Cancer Genome Facility, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ming LinACRF SA Cancer Genome Facility, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Rob KingACRF SA Cancer Genome Facility, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
David M LawrenceACRF SA Cancer Genome Facility, Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Peter MullerMaternal Fetal Medicine Service (MFMS), Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Shannon LeblancPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lesley McGregorPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Suzanne C E H SalleveltPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jan LiebeltPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Tristan S E HardyGenetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Janice M FletcherGenetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Hamish S ScottGenetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Abhi KulkarniGenetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Christopher P BarnettPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1717-3824
Karin S KassahnFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1662-3355
South Australia Pathology · AUWomen's and Children's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrio exome sequencing can be used to investigate congenital abnormalities identified on pregnancy ultrasound, but its use in an Australian context has not been assessed.

aimsAssess clinical outcomes and changes in management after expedited genomic testing in the prenatal period to guide the development of a model for widespread implementation. MATERIALS AND

methodsForty-three prospective referrals for whole exome sequencing, including 40 trios (parents and pregnancy), two singletons and one duo were assessed in a tertiary hospital setting with access to a state-wide pathology laboratory. Diagnostic yield, turn-around time (TAT), gestational age at reporting, pregnancy outcome, change in management and future pregnancy status were assessed for each family.

resultsA clinically significant genomic diagnosis was made in 15/43 pregnancies (35%), with an average TAT of 12 days. Gestational age at time of report ranged from 16 + 5 to 31 + 6 weeks (median 21 + 3 weeks). Molecular diagnoses included neuromuscular and skeletal disorders, RASopathies and a range of other rare Mendelian disorders. The majority of families actively used the results in pregnancy decision making as well as in management of future pregnancies.

conclusionsRapid second trimester prenatal genomic testing can be successfully delivered to investigate structural abnormalities in pregnancy, providing crucial guidance for current and future pregnancy management. The time-sensitive nature of this testing requires close laboratory and clinical collaboration to ensure appropriate referral and result communication. We found the establishment of a prenatal coordinator role and dedicated reporting team to be important facilitators. We propose this as a model for genomic testing in other prenatal services.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingPrenatal DiagnosisAdultAustraliaExome SequencingFemaleGestational AgeHumansPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePregnancy Trimester, SecondPrenatal CareProspective Studiescongenital abnormalitiesexomegenomicsprenatal diagnosisrapid

Identifiers

PMID38577897
PMCPMC11660018
OpenAlexW4393980628

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.