SynthesisClinical and experimental medicine2025
The application of next-generation sequencing technology in congenital haemolytic anaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Congenital haemolytic anaemia (CHA) poses diagnostic challenges due to genetic heterogeneity. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic efficacy of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in CHA. We systematically searched PubMed and Web of Science until April 2025. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies applying NGS (whole-exome sequencing [WES], whole-genome sequencing [WGS], clinical exome sequencing [CES], or targeted panels) in confirmed/suspected CHA patients. Pooled positive detection rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses stratified by family history and disease subtypes were performed. Study quality was assessed via modified STARD criteria. Ten studies involving 885 patients were included. The pooled positive detection rate of NGS was 44.3% (95% CI: 32.4-56.3%, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed significantly higher detection rates in patients with family history (51.0%; 95% CI: 32.8-69.2%) versus sporadic cases (16.9%; 95% CI: 8.4-27.2%, p < 0.001). Disease-specific yields varied: red cell membrane disorders showed the highest rate (45.3%; 95% CI: 35.2-55.7%), followed by enzymatic disorders (26.7%; 95% CI: 18.8-35.3%). Among all positive cases, pathogenic variants in five core genes accounted for 76.82% of detected mutations: SPTB (25.06%), PKLR (17.10%), ANK1 (11.94%), SLC4A1 (11.48%), and SPTA1 (11.24%). SPTB and ANK1 mutations were most frequently identified in red cell membrane disorders, while PKLR variants were exclusive to enzymatic disorders. NGS demonstrates substantial diagnostic utility in CHA, resolving nearly half of cases overall and over 50% of familial presentations. Its efficacy is particularly pronounced in red cell membrane disorders linked to cytoskeletal genes (SPTB, ANK1, SPTA1). These findings support integrating NGS into first-line CHA diagnostics, with prioritization of core gene panels for cost-effective implementation.
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.