↓ Skip to main content

Chromosomal microarray analysis as the first-tier test for the identification of pathogenic copy number variants in chromosome 9 pericentric regions and its challenge

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cytogenetics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Chromosomal microarray analysis as the first-tier test for the identification of pathogenic copy number variants in chromosome 9 pericentric regions and its challenge
Published in
Molecular Cytogenetics, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13039-016-0272-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jia-Chi Wang, Fatih Z. Boyar

Abstract

Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has been recommended and practiced routinely in the large reference laboratories of U.S.A. as the first-tier test for the postnatal evaluation of individuals with intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorders, and/or multiple congenital anomalies. Using CMA as a diagnostic tool and without a routine setting of fluorescence in situ hybridization with labeled bacterial artificial chromosome probes (BAC-FISH) in the large reference laboratories becomes a challenge in the characterization of chromosome 9 pericentric region. This region has a very complex genomic structure and contains a variety of heterochromatic and euchromatic polymorphic variants. These variants were usually studied by G-banding, C-banding and BAC-FISH analysis. Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) was not recommended since it may lead to false positive results. Here, we presented a cohort of four cases, in which high-resolution CMA was used as the first-tier test or simultaneously with G-banding analysis on the proband to identify pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs) in the whole genome. CMA revealed large pathogenic CNVs from chromosome 9 in 3 cases which also revealed different G-banding patterns between the two chromosome 9 homologues. Although we demonstrated that high-resolution CMA played an important role in the identification of pathogenic copy number variants in chromosome 9 pericentric regions, the lack of BAC-FISH analysis or other useful tools renders significant challenges in the characterization of chromosome 9 pericentric regions. None; it is not a clinical trial, and the cases were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Librarian 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,467,278
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cytogenetics
#235
of 402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,559
of 357,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cytogenetics
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 402 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,745 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.