Back

Abnormal vertebral patterns in genetically heterogeneous deceased fetuses and neonates: evidence of selection against variations

Schut, P. C.; Brosens, E.; Galis, F.; Ten Broek, C. M.; Baijens, I. M.; Dremmen, M. H.; Tibboel, D.; Schol, M. P.; De Klein, A.; Eggink, A. J.; Cohen-Overbeek, T. E.

2019-10-01 evolutionary biology
10.1101/784926 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the vertebral pattern in a cohort of deceased fetuses and neonates, and to study the possible impact of DNA Copy Number Variations (CNVs) in coding regions and/or disturbing enhancers on the development of the vertebral pattern.\n\nMethodRadiographs of 445 fetuses and infants, deceased between 2009 and 2015, were assessed. Terminations of pregnancies, stillbirths and neonatal deaths were included. Patients were excluded if the vertebral pattern could not be determined. Copy number profiles of 265 patients were determined using single nucleotide polymorphism array.\n\nResults274/374 patients (73.3%) had an abnormal vertebral pattern. Cervical ribs were present in 188/374 (50.3%) and were significantly more common in stillbirths (69/128 (53.9%)) and terminations of pregnancies (101/188 (53.7%)), compared to live births (18/58, 31.0%, p = 0.006). None of the rare CNVs were recurrent or overlapped candidate genes for vertebral patterning.\n\nConclusionThe presence of an abnormal vertebral pattern, particularly in the cervical region, could be a sign of disruption at critical, highly interactive and conserved stages of embryogenesis. The vertebral pattern might provide valuable information regarding fetal and neonatal outcome. CNV analyses did not identify a mutual genetic cause for the occurrence of vertebral patterning abnormalities, indicating genetic heterogeneity.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.