ArticleScientific reports2026
Xq28 duplication not F8 inversion: integrated genetic reanalysis redefines prenatal carrier diagnosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Abstract
This study aimed to resolve diagnostic discrepancies in which expanded carrier screening (ECS) in a healthy population suggested hemophilia A carrier status due to F8 intron 22 inversion (Inv22), while further analysis revealed a true distal Xq28 duplication. We evaluated the clinical utility of integrated genetic technologies in distinguishing between these two entities. A healthy pregnant woman underwent ECS, with long-distance polymerase chain reaction (LD-PCR) specifically employed for F8 Inv22 detection. Given the identified heterozygote of F8 inversion, prenatal diagnosis was conducted, integrating LD-PCR, single-nucleotide polymorphism array (SNP array), optical genome mapping (OGM), third-generation long-read sequencing, and X-chromosome inactivation (XCI) analysis to characterize the variant thoroughly. Initial LD-PCR suggested F8 Inv22 in both the fetus and the mother. SNP array revealed a 0.5-Mb Xq28 duplication spanning F8 exons 1-22. OGM and long-read sequencing confirmed the occurrence of duplication while excluding the F8 inversion, revealing int22h-1/int22h-2-mediated nonallelic homologous recombination as the mechanism. XCI analysis revealed skewed inactivation (18.1%) of the duplicated allele in the asymptomatic mother, whereas the fetus exhibited a random XCI pattern. This study highlights a critical diagnostic pitfall: even well-established techniques such as LD-PCR for F8 Inv22 may yield misleading results when applied to general population screening beyond their original diagnostic context. This underscores the importance of accurate interpretation of ECS results through appropriate analytic validation. We propose a tiered strategy: LD-PCR screening followed by OGM or long-read sequencing to differentiate F8 inversions from Xq28 duplications in the general population.
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.