Cited by 419Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesGenomics and Rare Diseases

Molecular Diagnostic Yield of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis and Whole-Exome Sequencing in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Tammimies, Kristiina, Marshall, Christian R., Walker, Susan, Kaur, Gaganjot, Thiruvahindrapuram, Bhooma, Lionel, Anath C., Yuen, Ryan K. C., Uddin, Mohammed +26 more·2015·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The use of genome-wide tests to provide molecular diagnosis for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) requires more study. OBJECTIVE: To perform chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) and whole-exome sequencing (WES) in a heterogeneous group of children with ASD to determine the molecular diagnostic yield of these tests in a sample typical of a developmental pediatric clinic. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The sample consisted of 258 consecutively ascertained unrelated children with ASD who underwent detailed assessments to define morphology scores based on the presence of major congenital abnormalities and minor physical anomalies. The children were recruited between 2008 and 2013 in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. The probands were stratified into 3 groups of increasing morphological severity: essential, equivocal, and complex (scores of 0-3, 4-5, and ≥6). EXPOSURES: All probands underwent CMA, with WES performed for 95 proband-parent trios. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The overall molecular diagnostic yield for CMA and WES in a population-based ASD sample stratified in 3 phenotypic groups. RESULTS: Of 258 probands, 24 (9.3%, 95%CI, 6.1%-13.5%) received a molecular diagnosis from CMA and 8 of 95 (8.4%, 95%CI, 3.7%-15.9%) from WES. The yields were statistically different between the morphological groups. Among the children who underwent both CMA and WES testing, the estimated proportion with an identifiable genetic etiology was 15.8% (95%CI, 9.1%-24.7%; 15/95 children). This included 2 children who received molecular diagnoses from both tests. The combined yield was significantly higher in the complex group when compared with the essential group (pairwise comparison, P = .002). [table: see text]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among a heterogeneous sample of children with ASD, the molecular diagnostic yields of CMA and WES were comparable, and the combined molecular diagnostic yield was higher in children with more complex morphological phenotypes in comparison with the children in the essential category. If replicated in additional populations, these findings may inform appropriate selection of molecular diagnostic testing for children affected by ASD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2015.10078

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous studies have identified molecular diagnoses in 6-37% of individuals with ASD, with higher yields in individuals with additional co-morbidities including intellectual disabilities, seizures, and other medical features.

    “Previous studies have identified molecular diagnoses in 6–37% of individuals with ASD, with higher yields in individuals with additional co-morbidities that include intellectual disabilities, seizures, and other medical features.5”
  • Known genetic factors explain only about 20% of ASD cases.

    “collectively, these genetic factors are involved in the etiology of only ~20% of ASD cases17,18.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tammimies, K., Marshall, C. R., Walker, S., Kaur, G., Thiruvahindrapuram, B., Lionel, A. C., Yuen, R. K. C., Uddin, M., Roberts, W., Weksberg, R., Woodbury-Smith, M., Zwaigenbaum, L., Anagnostou, E., Wang, Z., Wei, J., Howe, J. L., Gazzellone, M. J., Lau, L., Sung, W. W. L., Whitten, K., Vardy, C., Crosbie, V., Tsang, B., D’Abate, L., Tong, W. W. L., Luscombe, S., Doyle, T., Carter, M. T., Szatmari, P., Stuckless, S., Merico, D., Stavropoulos, D. J., Scherer, S. W., & Fernandez, B. A.
Affiliations
  • Hospital for Sick Children (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Bloorview Research Institute (CA)
  • Eastern Health (CA)
  • Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
Venue
JAMA
Published
2015-09-01
Volume
314
Issue
9
Pages
895
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2128274087
Cited by
419
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 4
FWCI
23.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, chromosomal microarray analysis, exome sequencing, genetic etiology, morphological phenotypes, congenital malformations, children
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Child, Child Development Disorders, Pervasive, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Mutation, Phenotype, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Sequence Analysis, Protein, Asperger Syndrome, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques, Microarray Analysis, Exome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review