Clinical impact of additional findings detected by genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing: Follow-up results of the TRIDENT-2 study.

In the TRIDENT-2 study, all pregnant women in the Netherlands are offered genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing (GW-NIPT) with a choice of receiving either full screening or screening solely for common trisomies. Previous data showed that GW-NIPT can reliably detect common trisomies in the general obstetric population and that this test can also detect other chromosomal abnormalities (additional findings). However, evidence regarding the clinical impact of screening for additional findings is lacking. Therefore, we present follow-up results of the TRIDENT-2 study to determine this clinical impact based on the laboratory and perinatal outcomes of cases with additional findings. Between April 2017 and April 2019, additional findings were detected in 402/110,739 pregnancies (0.36%). For 358 cases, the origin was proven to be either fetal (n = 79; 22.1%), (assumed) confined placental mosaicism (CPM) (n = 189; 52.8%), or maternal (n = 90; 25.1%). For the remaining 44 (10.9%), the origin of the aberration could not be determined. Most fetal chromosomal aberrations were pathogenic and associated with severe clinical phenotypes (61/79; 77.2%). For CPM cases, occurrence of pre-eclampsia (8.5% [16/189] vs 0.5% [754/159,924]; RR 18.5), and birth weight <2.3rd percentile (13.6% [24/177] vs 2.5% [3,892/155,491]; RR 5.5) were significantly increased compared to the general obstetric population. Of the 90 maternal findings, 12 (13.3%) were malignancies and 32 (35.6%) (mosaic) pathogenic copy number variants, mostly associated with mild or no clinical phenotypes. Data from this large cohort study provide crucial information for deciding if and how to implement GW-NIPT in screening programs. Additionally, these data can inform the challenging interpretation, counseling, and follow-up of additional findings.

European guidelines for constitutional cytogenomic analysis.

With advancing technology and the consequent shift towards an increasing application of molecular genetic techniques (e.g., microarrays, next-generation sequencing) with the potential for higher resolution in specific contexts, as well as the application of combined testing strategies for the diagnosis of chromosomal disorders, it is crucial that cytogenetic/cytogenomic services keep up to date with technology and have documents that provide guidance in this constantly evolving scenario. These new guidelines therefore aim to provide an updated, practical and easily available document that will enable genetic laboratories to operate within acceptable standards and to maintain a quality service.

A survey of undetected, clinically relevant chromosome abnormalities when replacing postnatal karyotyping by Whole Genome Sequencing.

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) holds the potential to identify pathogenic gene mutations, copy number variation, uniparental disomy and structural rearrangements in a single genetic test. With its high diagnostic yield and decreasing costs, the question arises whether WGS can serve as a single test for all referrals to diagnostic genome laboratories ("one test fits all"). Here, we provide an estimate for the proportion of clinically relevant aberrations identified by light microscopy in postnatal referrals that would go undetected by WGS. To this end, we compiled the clinically relevant abnormal findings for each of the different referral categories in our laboratory during the period 2006-2015. We assumed that WGS would be performed on 300-500 bp DNA fragments with 150-bp paired sequence reads, and that the mean genome coverage is 30x, corresponding to current practice. For the detection of chromosomal mosaicism we set minimum thresholds of 10% for monosomy and 20% for trisomy. Based on the literature we assumed that balanced Robertsonian translocations and ∼9% of other, balanced chromosome rearrangements would not be detectable because of breakpoints in sequences of repetitive DNA. Based on our analysis of all 14,957 referrals, including 1455 abnormal cases, we show that at least 8.1% of these abnormalities would escape detection (corresponding to 0.79% of all referrals). The highest rate occurs in referrals of premature ovarian failure, as 73.3% of abnormalities would not be identified because of the frequent occurrence of low-level sex chromosome mosaicism. Among referrals of recurrent miscarriage, 25.6% of abnormalities would go undetected, mainly because of a high proportion of balanced Robertsonian translocations. In referrals of mental retardation (with or without multiple congenital anomalies) the abnormality would be missed in only 0.35% of referrals. These include cases without imbalances of unique DNA sequences but of clinical relevance, as for example, r(20) epilepsy syndrome. The expected shift to large-scale implementation of WGS ("one test fits most") as initial genetic test will be beneficial to patients and their families, since a cause for the clinical phenotype can be identified in more cases by a single genetic test at an early phase in the diagnostic process. However, a niche for genome analysis by light microscopy will remain. For example, in referrals of newborns with a suspicion of Down syndrome, karyotyping is not only a cost-effective method for providing a quick diagnosis, but also discriminates between trisomy 21 and a Robertsonian translocation involving chromosome 21. Thus, when replacing karyotyping by WGS, one must be aware of the rates and spectra of undetected abnormalities. In addition, it is equally important that requirements for cytogenetic follow-up studies are recognized.

Discordant NIPT result in a viable trisomy-21 pregnancy due to prolonged contribution to cfDNA by a demised trisomy-14 cotwin.

One of the confounders in noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is the vanishing twin phenomenon. Prolonged contribution to the maternal Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) pool by cytotrophoblasts representing a demised, aneuploid cotwin may lead to a false-positive outcome for a normal, viable twin. We show that a vanishing trisomy-14 twin contributes to cfDNA for more than 2 weeks after demise.

Origin and clinical relevance of chromosomal aberrations other than the common trisomies detected by genome-wide NIPS: results of the TRIDENT study.

PurposeNoninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA in maternal blood is highly sensitive for detecting fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13. Using a genome-wide approach, other chromosome anomalies can also be detected. We report on the origin, frequency, and clinical significance of these other chromosome aberrations found in pregnancies at risk for trisomy 21, 18, or 13.MethodsWhole-genome shallow massively parallel sequencing was used and all autosomes were analyzed.ResultsIn 78 of 2,527 cases (3.1%) NIPS was indicative of trisomy 21, 18, or 13, and in 41 (1.6%) of other chromosome aberrations. The latter were of fetal (n = 10), placental (n = 22), maternal (n = 1) or unknown (n = 7). One case lacked cytogenetic follow-up. Nine of the 10 fetal cases were associated with an abnormal phenotype. Thirteen of the 22 (59%) placental aberrations were associated with fetal congenital anomalies and/or poor fetal growth (

Cell-free fetal DNA in the maternal circulation originates from the cytotrophoblast: proof from an unique case.

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and direct karyotyping of cytotrophoblast were normal for a male fetus, but cultured chorionic villus mesenchymal cells and umbilical cord fibroblasts showed nonmosaic trisomy 18. This observation provides direct evidence for the cytotrophoblastic origin of cell-free fetal DNA and yields a biological explanation for falsely reassuring NIPT results.

Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study.

BACKGROUND: In the past 30 years karyotyping was the gold standard for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aberrations in the fetus. Traditional karyotyping (TKT) has a high accuracy and reliability. However, it is labor intensive, the results take 14-21 days, the costs are high and unwanted findings such as abnormalities with unknown clinical relevance are not uncommon. These disadvantages challenged the practice of karyotyping. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) is a new molecular genetic technique in prenatal diagnosis. Previous preclinical evidence suggests equivalence of MLPA and traditional karyotyping (TKT) regarding test performance. METHODS/DESIGN: The proposed study is a multicentre diagnostic substitute study among pregnant women, who choose to have amniocentesis for the indication advanced maternal age and/or increased risk following prenatal screening test. In all subjects, both MLPA and karyotyping will be performed on the amniotic fluid sample. The primary outcome is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes will be maternal quality of life, women's preferences and costs. Analysis will be intention to treat and per protocol analysis. Quality of life analysis will be carried out within the study population. The study aims to include 4500 women. DISCUSSION: The study results are expected to help decide whether MLPA can replace traditional karyotyping for 'low-risk' pregnancies in terms of diagnostic accuracy, quality of life and women's preferences. This will be the first clinical study to report on all relevant aspects of the potential replacement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered in the clinical trial register number ISRCTN47252164.

Detection of chromosome abnormalities by quantitative fluorescent PCR in ectopic pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential value of quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) in the detection of chromosome abnormalities in ectopic pregnancies. METHODS: Seventy chorionic villi samples of ectopic pregnancies were studied by QF-PCR. Primers for chromosomes 16, 21, X and Y in chorionic villi were evaluated. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed when results of QF-PCR showed aneuploidy, in case of unexplicable QF-PCR peaks, and in 10 cases with normal QF-PCR results. RESULTS: QF-PCR produced a result for chromosomes X and Y in 66 cases (94%), for chromosome 16 in 62 cases (89%) and for chromosome 21 in 55 cases (79%). Overall, QF-PCR produced a result for the chromosomes tested in 54 ectopic pregnancy cases (77%). Fifty-two of these results were normal disomic (96%) and two were abnormal, one trisomy 16 (2%) and one triploidy (2%). In 16 cases (23%) no definite QF-PCR results could be obtained for all chromosomes, 11 due to amplification failure, and 5 due to unexplicable QF-PCR peaks. In 10 cases with normal QF-PCR results, disomy was confirmed by FISH. The trisomy 16 was also confirmed by FISH. Furthermore, a result was obtained with FISH in 5 of the cases without definite QF-PCR results. CONCLUSION: Although QF-PCR can establish the chromosomal status in ectopic pregnancies for chromosomes 16, 21, X and Y in the majority of cases, the technical failure rate is still considerable and does not improve results when compared to cytogenetic techniques.

How unexpected are unexpected findings in prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis? A literature review.

The objective of this review was to gain understanding about unexpected findings in prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis. This category of results might be excluded from prenatal testing when new molecular tests such as I-FISH and QF-PCR will be applied in a future scenario of targeted testing. The literature was systematically searched for publications wherein the term unexpected or a synonym refers to testing results with specific problems. On the selected articles a qualitative analysis was performed, using the methods of cross-case analysis and within-case analysis. Sixteen articles published between 1979 and 2003 were selected. Analysis led to the classification of four problems of unexpected findings: I. unexpected for professionals; II. unexpected for patients; III. uncertainty; IV. other difficult counselling issues. We conclude that currently the problems of unexpected findings relate only slightly to their unexpected character. Instead, the main problems of unexpected findings relate to uncertainty and other aspects which create difficult counselling issues. As such, unexpected findings can be distinguished only gradually from standard results. Before targeted testing can be applied it is necessary to establish exact criteria in order to discern unexpected findings from standard testing results.