ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Molecular Genetics and Reproductive Genomic Medicine in Cleft Lip and Palate: Current Evidence, Preimplantation Testing, and Clinical Translation-A Narrative Review.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cleft lip and palate (CLP) is a common congenital craniofacial anomaly with heterogeneous clinical manifestations and complex etiologies. Current evidence indicates that CLP arises from the combined effects of Mendelian syndromic disorders, rare pathogenic variants, common susceptibility loci, non-coding regulatory variants, epigenetic regulation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and maternal environmental exposures. Although reconstructive surgery and multidisciplinary care remain central to treatment, families with recurrent CLP or a family history of orofacial clefts increasingly seek reproductive counseling and genetic risk assessment before pregnancy. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) may provide a clinically meaningful option when a pathogenic variant, chromosomal abnormality, or clearly defined familial haplotype is identified. However, most non-syndromic CLP cases are polygenic or multifactorial, and the application of preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disorders (PGT-P) remains limited by modest predictive accuracy, population-specific transferability, embryo-number constraints, incomplete penetrance, variants of uncertain significance, and uncertain long-term clinical utility. This narrative review summarizes the clinical phenotypes and genomic architecture of CLP, evaluates the principles and current limitations of preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) and PGT-P, and discusses psychosocial and ethical issues in reproductive decision-making. We propose that PGT for CLP should be positioned as part of a stepwise counseling framework rather than as a universal preventive strategy. Future progress will depend on standardized phenotyping, multi-ancestry genomic databases, functional validation of candidate variants, transparent risk communication, and shared decision-making that respects both reproductive autonomy and the uncertainty of genomic prediction.
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.