Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40233080›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2025

Genome-wide nucleosome footprints of plasma cfDNA predict preterm birth: A case-control study.

Zhiwei Guo, Ke Wang, Xiang Huang, Kun Li, Guojun Ouyang, Xu Yang, Jiayu Tan, Haihong Shi, Liangping Luo, Min Zhang and 8 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Advances in cfDNA research for pregnancy-related diseases.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Review
  9. 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

18 authors.

Zhiwei GuoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0375-0838
Ke WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiang HuangPrenatal Diagnosis Center, Foshan Women and Children Hospital, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Kun LiInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Guojun OuyangGuangzhou Darui Biotechnology Co, Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Xu YangInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2242-670X
Jiayu TanEmergency Department, Foshan Women and Children Hospital, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Haihong ShiMedical Genetics Center, Jiangmen Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Jiangmen, Guangdong, China.
Liangping LuoSchool of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Min ZhangInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Bowei HanInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7176-8258
Xiangming ZhaiInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jinhai DengRichard Dimbleby Department of Cancer Research, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2899-5332
Richard BeatsonKing's College London, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guy's Cancer Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Yingsong WuInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Fang YangDepartment of Fetal Medicine and Prenatal Diagnosis, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Xuexi YangInstitute of Antibody Engineering, School of Laboratory Medicine and Biotechnology, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3513-6501
Jia TangNHC Key Laboratory of Male Reproduction and Genetics, Guangdong Provincial Reproductive Science Institute (Guangdong Provincial Fertility Hospital), Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-934X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreterm birth (PTB) occurs in approximately 11% of all births worldwide, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality for both mothers and their offspring. Identifying pregnancies at risk of preterm birth during early pregnancy may help improve interventions and reduce its incidence. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA), derived from placenta and other maternal tissues, serves as a dynamic indicator of biological processes and pathological changes in pregnancy. These properties establish cfDNA as a valuable biomarker for investigating pregnancy complications, including PTB. METHODS AND

findingsTo date, there are few methods available for PTB prediction that have been developed with large sample sizes, high-throughput screening, and validated in independent cohorts. To address this gap, we established a large-scale, multi-center case-control study involving 2,590 pregnancies (2,072 full-term and 518 preterm) from three independent hospitals to develop a spontaneous preterm birth classifier. We performed whole-genome sequencing on cfDNA, focusing on promoter profiling (read depth of promoter regions spanning from -1 to +1 kb around transcriptional start sites). Using four machine learning models and two feature selection algorithms, we developed classifiers for predicting preterm birth. Among these, the classifier based on the support vector machine model, named PTerm (Promoter profiling classifier for preterm prediction), exhibited the highest area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.878 (0.852-0.904) following leave-one-out cross-validation. Additionally, PTerm exhibited strong performance in three independent validation cohorts, achieving an overall AUC of 0.849 (0.831-0.866).

conclusionsIn summary, PTerm demonstrated high accuracy in predicting preterm birth. Additionally, it can be utilized with current non-invasive prenatal test data without changing its procedures or increasing detection cost, making it easily adaptable for preclinical tests.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsNucleosomesPremature BirthAdultBiomarkersCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyPromoter Regions, GeneticSupport Vector MachineWhole Genome SequencingBiomarkersCell-Free Nucleic AcidsNucleosomes

Identifiers

PMID40233080
PMCPMC11999135

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.