ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2025
Prenatal Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS): to report or not to report?
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fetal Hepatosplenomegaly: Stepwise Diagnostic Framework, Diagnostic Approach to Fetal Hepatosplenomegaly.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical outcomes after nondiagnostic prenatal exome sequencing: Need for balancing reassurance and residual risks in genetic counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Article
- Genetic Traces in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Whole Exome Sequencing Study from Türkiye.Genes · 2026Article
- Prenatal Use of Exome Sequencing and Chromosomal Microarray Analysis: Indications, Interpretation, and Gene Selection Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Uncertainty, ethics, and progress in genomic medicine.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prenatal Exome Sequencing (pES) has a significant diagnostic yield but time pressure and limited phenotypic information make interpretation of Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS) more challenging than in a postnatal setting. We share our experiences of prenatal reporting of highly suspicious VUS. We retrospectively analyzed pregnancies in which VUS identified by pES were reported to parents during pregnancy in two Dutch academic medical hospitals. During the study period, 31 VUS in 28 genes were reported in 27 pregnancies. Cases were assigned to one of five groups based on consistency of prenatal phenotypes with gene-associated diagnoses. The implications of VUS included clinical evaluation of parental carriers (N = 4), additional screening of proband (N = 2), influencing parental decision-making (N = 11) and/or prompting confirmatory testing (N = 10). Reanalysis with currently available data resulted in reclassification of seven variants, five of which were upgraded to (likely) pathogenic. Although we do not recommend routine disclosure, our data suggest that prenatal reporting of VUS can be valuable in exceptional cases. Stringent selection was applied and only a minority of reported VUS was reclassified as (likely) pathogenic. Therefore, a careful individual assessment of each VUS case remains imperative and multidisciplinary meetings should be an integral part of prenatal VUS management.
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.