ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2026
Clinical implications of rare and common variation in preimplantation genetic testing for breast cancer.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- PEStimate: predicting offspring disease risk after polygenic embryo screening.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Modeling polygenic embryo screening in real-world IVF patients demonstrates limitations on efficacy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- A context-specific evaluation of polygenic embryo screening in best-prognosis preimplantation genetic testing cycles.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recently, some clinics have begun using preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) for moderately penetrant breast cancer (BC) risk variants, while other clinics use polygenic risk scores (PRS) in the context of preimplantation embryo screening. Using both simulation and formal mathematical approaches, we evaluated: (1) in what circumstances embryo selection using PRS could lead to systematically erroneous results due to failure to consider monogenic carrier status; and (2) whether PGT-M for moderate penetrance variants could lead to erroneous results due to unassessed, yet elevated PRS. Variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 resulted in a risk distribution that was essentially disjoint from the non-carriers, regardless of PRS. By contrast, for moderately penetrant genes, standard PGT-M would fail to select the lowest risk embryo approximately 5% of the time due to elevated PRS. This complex interplay suggests that caution should be exercised when considering preimplantation genetic testing involving exclusively monogenic variants of moderate penetrance or polygenic scores.
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.