2014
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.18
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impact of chromosomal microarray on clinical management: a retrospective analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
59
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 69 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
7
59
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Current single-gene disorder analyses or chromosomal microarray analyses have a diagnostic rate of ~13-14% in these patient populations, emphasizing the need for new molecular technologies. 26,27 Several previous reports using a trio-based WES strategy in large, specific patient populations reported diagnostic yields of ~25%, with some smaller studies reporting yields of up to 45-55%. 7,20,[28][29][30] The yield in this study is comparable to the 25% from these large patient population yields, and it demonstrates the power of WES to identify the genetic cause of disease in cohorts of intellectually disabled patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Current single-gene disorder analyses or chromosomal microarray analyses have a diagnostic rate of ~13-14% in these patient populations, emphasizing the need for new molecular technologies. 26,27 Several previous reports using a trio-based WES strategy in large, specific patient populations reported diagnostic yields of ~25%, with some smaller studies reporting yields of up to 45-55%. 7,20,[28][29][30] The yield in this study is comparable to the 25% from these large patient population yields, and it demonstrates the power of WES to identify the genetic cause of disease in cohorts of intellectually disabled patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7,8 Two other studies reported on retrospective cohorts for which actual rates of clinical implications were available and found that more than 50% of all patients with abnormalities had clinical management changes based on microarray results. 9,11 Although microarrays are now common first-tier tests in this patient population and Original research article supported by medical guidelines from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG), 12 the International Collaboration for Clinical Genomics (ISCA/ICCG), 5 and the American Academy of Neurology, 13 payer reimbursement for testing is inconsistent, indicating the need for additional systematic studies assessing the changes in patient management that occur as a result of microarray testing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[3][4][5] In recent years, the implementation of highthroughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), array comparative genomic hybridization and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays, has facilitated and expedited the discovery of numerous genes that cause or contribute to various forms of ID. 6,7 Out of the autosomal genes known to have a role in severe ID, the dual-specificity tyrosine-phosphorylation-regulated kinase (DYRK1A) gene (OMIM 600855) has been one of the most extensively studied. [8][9][10][11] Interest in DYRK1A originated because of its genomic localization within the Down syndrome critical region (DSCR) on chromosome 21q22, a chromosomal region that is presumed to be largely responsible for the neuropathologic abnormalities observed in Down syndrome.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%