ArticleJournal of human genetics2025
Diagnostic yield of trio exome sequencing as a first-tier test for identifying genetic causes of pregnancy loss.
Article in Journal of human genetics, 2025. 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic defects are a major cause of pregnancy loss, leading to fetal death or elective abortion due to congenital anomalies. This study evaluates the effectiveness of trio exome sequencing (ES) in identifying genetic causes of pregnancy loss. Trio ES was used as a first-tier genetic test on 193 cases of pregnancy loss to detect both chromosomal abnormalities and small variants potentially linked to fetal death and anomalies. The pathogenicity of identified variants was assessed, and the diagnostic yield was analyzed. Trio ES provided an overall diagnostic yield of 24% (47/193) across this cohort, with a similar positive rate observed in fetal death (26%, 12/45) and elective abortion (23%, 35/148) groups. Among diagnosed cases, 45% (21/47) were attributed to chromosomal abnormalities, while 55% (26/47) were caused by small variants. This suggests that ES more than doubled the positive rates compared to traditional methods such as karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis. Notably, chromosomal abnormalities were the primary cause of fetal death (75%, 9/12), whereas small variants were more prevalent in elective abortion cases (68%, 24/35), particularly those with central nervous and skeletal anomalies. Additional candidate variants were identified in 35 inconclusive cases (18%), potentially further increasing the detection rate. This study highlights the value of trio ES in diagnosing genetic causes of pregnancy loss. Implementing it as a first-tier test can significantly enhance our understanding of fetal death and anomalies, therefore facilitating informed future pregnancy management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40702308What 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.