Antenatal diagnosis of CHARGE syndrome: Prenatal ultrasound findings and crucial role of fetal dysmorphic signs. About a series of 10 cases and review of literature.

Although the prognosis of CHARGE syndrome can be highly variable from mild until severe, final diagnosis is difficult to establish in utero. The aim of our study is to compare antenatal and postnatal findings in a retrospective cohort of 10 successive patients with a positive CHD7 gene variant in order to identify the specific prenatal features for CHARGE syndrome diagnosis. Fetal ultrasound, follow-up and supplementary investigations are collected and compared to postnatal findings. Congenital heart defect (7/10), choanal atresia (7/10) and tracheoesophageal atresia (4/10) are the most frequent fetal anomalies found. Inner and external ear anomalies appear as the keystone (constant features) for prenatal diagnosis of CHARGE syndrome in fetuses with multiple anomalies and normal microarray karyotype. External ear malformations are identified in all cases by 3D ultrasound when carefully evaluated. MRI and temporal bone CT-Scan are second line useful tools to assess the diagnosis when looking for semicircular canal agenesis, arhinencephaly and/or choanal atresia. Before availability of prenatal exome sequencing in clinical routine, present findings lead to the recommendation that fetuses, with congenital heart defect (mainly septal and conotruncal), cleft lip/palate or unexplained polyhydramnios should carefully be screened for clues suggesting CHARGE syndrome using 2D and 3D ultrasound, MRI and temporal bone CT-Scan. When CHARGE syndrome is suspected with normal molecular karyotype, CHD7 gene sequencing must be offered.

Using outcome data from one thousand mosaic embryo transfers to formulate an embryo ranking system for clinical use.

OBJECTIVE: To study how the attributes of mosaicism identified during preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy relate to clinical outcomes, in order to formulate a ranking system of mosaic embryos for intrauterine transfer. DESIGN: Compiled analysis. SETTING: Multi-center. PATIENT(S): A total of 5,561 euploid blastocysts and 1,000 mosaic blastocysts used in clinical transfers in patients undergoing fertility treatment. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Implantation (gestational sac), ongoing pregnancy, birth, and spontaneous abortion (miscarriage before 20 weeks of gestation). RESULT(S): The euploid group had significantly more favorable rates of implantation and ongoing pregnancy/birth (OP/B) compared with the combined mosaic group or the mosaic group affecting only whole chromosomes (implantation: 57.2% vs. 46.5% vs. 41.8%; OP/B: 52.3% vs. 37.0% vs. 31.3%), as well as lower likelihood of spontaneous abortion (8.6% vs. 20.4% vs. 25%). Whole-chromosome mosaic embryos with level (percent aneuploid cells) <50% had significantly more favorable outcomes than the ≥50% group (implantation: 44.5% vs. 30.4%; OP/B: 36.1% vs. 19.3%). Mosaic type (nature of the aneuploidy implicated in mosaicism) affected outcomes, with a significant correlation between number of affected chromosomes and unfavorable outcomes. This ranged from mosaicism involving segmental abnormalities to complex aneuploidies affecting three or more chromosomes (implantation: 51.6% vs. 30.4%; OP/B: 43.1% vs. 20.8%). Combining mosaic level, type, and embryo morphology revealed the order of subcategories regarding likelihood of positive outcome. CONCLUSION(S): This compiled analysis revealed traits of mosaicism identified with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy that affected outcomes in a statistically significant manner, enabling the formulation of an evidence-based prioritization scheme for mosaic embryos in the clinic.

Genetic counseling for women with 45,X/46,XX mosaicism: Towards more personalized management.

Despite numerous clinical series, consistent karyotype-phenotype correlations for Turner syndrome have not been established, although a lower level of 45,X is generally thought to be associated with a milder phenotype. This limits personalized counseling for women with 45,X/46,XX mosaicism. To better understand the phenotypic spectrum associated with various levels of 45,X/46,XX mosaicism, we compared patients evaluated in the Massachusetts General Hospital Turner Syndrome Clinic to determine if cardiac, renal, and thyroid abnormalities correlated with the percentage of 45,X cells present in a peripheral blood karyotype. of the 118 patients included in the study, 78 (66%) patients had non-mosaic 45,X and 40 (34%) patients had varying levels of 45,X/46,XX mosaicism. Patients with ≤70% 45,X compared with those with >70% 45,X had a significantly lower frequency of cardiac and renal anomalies. The presence of hypothyroidism was somewhat lower for the ≤70% 45,X group, but was not statistically significant. Supplemental tissue testing on another tissue type, typically buccal mucosa, was often useful in counseling patients with 45,X mosaicism. Given the modest sample size of patients with varying levels of mosaicism and the variability of Turner syndrome abnormalities, we hope this preliminary study will inspire a multicenter collaboration, which may lead to modification of clinical guidelines. Because several patients with ≤70% 45,X were ascertained from perinatal care referrals, we still advise women with 45,X mosaicism pursuing pregnancy to receive standard Turner syndrome cardiac surveillance. There is an opportunity to personalize counseling and surveillance for patients based on percentage of 45,X cells on chromosome analysis.

Prenatal diagnosis of BACs-on-Beads assay in 1520 cases from Fujian Province, China.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the application of BACs-on-Beads (BoBs™) assay for rapid detection of chromosomal abnormalities for prenatal diagnosis (PND). METHODS: A total of 1520 samples, including seven chorionic villi biopsy samples, 1328 amniotic fluid samples, and 185 umbilical cord samples from pregnant women were collected to detect the chromosomal abnormalities using BoBs™ assay and karyotyping. Furthermore, abnormal specimens were verified by chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the success rate of karyotyping and BoBs™ assay in PND was 98.09% and 100%, respectively. BoBs™ assay was concordant with karyotyping for Trisomy 21, Trisomy 18, and Trisomy 13, sex chromosomal aneuploidy, Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, and mosaicism. BoBs™ assay also detected Smith-Magenis syndrome, Williams-Beuren syndrome, DiGeorge syndrome, Miller-Dieker syndrome, Prader-Willi syndrome, Xp22.31 microdeletions, 22q11.2, and 17p11.2 microduplications. However, karyotyping failed to show these chromosomal abnormalities. A case of 8q21.2q23.3 duplication which was found by karyotyping was not detected by BoBs™ assay. Furthermore, all these chromosomal abnormalities were consistent with CMA and FISH verifications. According to the reports, we estimated that the detection rates of karyotyping, BoBs™, and CMA in the present study were 4.28%, 4.93%, and 5%, respectively, which is consistent with the results of a previous study. The respective costs for the three methods were about $135-145, $270-290, and $540-580. CONCLUSION: BoBs™ assay is considered a reliable, rapid test for use in PND. A variety of comprehensive technological applications can complement each other in PND, in order to maximize the diagnosis rate and reduce the occurrence of birth defects.

Efficiency of noninvasive prenatal testing for the detection of fetal microdeletions and microduplications in autosomal chromosomes.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is commonly used to screen for fetal genetic abnormalities. However, the ability of NIPT to detect copy number variations (CNVs) has not been reported. Accordingly, in this study, we analyzed the efficiency of NIPT for the detection of fetal autosomal CNVs. METHODS: Patients who were positive for autosomal CNVs by NIPT and underwent diagnostic studies by karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray (CMA) were evaluated. Samples were divided into groups according to age, in vitro fertilization, fetal-free DNA concentration, uniquely mapped reads number, CNV size, and CNV type. RESULTS: Chromosomal microarray showed that the positive predictive value (PPV) of autosomal CNVs detected by NIPT was 14.89%. Increasing fetal DNA concentrations and uniquely mapped read numbers did not affect the PPV of CNVs detected by NIPT. There were no differences between microduplication and microdeletion PPVs detected by NIPT. The PPV of CNVs less than 10 Mb was significantly higher than that of CNVs greater than 10 Mb detected by NIPT. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of NIPT for autosomal CNVs needs to be improved.

In-house genetic counseling increases the detection of abnormal karyotypes-a 26-year experience in prenatal diagnosis in a single tertiary referral hospital in Poland.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the trends in prenatal diagnosis over 26 years in a tertiary referral hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of invasive prenatal procedures performed between 1991 and 2016. Maternal characteristics, indications for invasive diagnosis, and percentage of abnormal karyotypes were compared between periods according to guidelines implemented nationally and locally. RESULTS: A total of 14,302 invasive prenatal procedures were performed. The proportion of invasive procedures performed for advanced maternal age, abnormal karyotype in a previous pregnancy, and maternal anxiety decreased from 71.1%, 17.8%, 8.9% in 1991 to 23.9%, 1.3%, and 2.3% in 2016 (OR 0.6, 0.8, and 0.9 for each 5 years, respectively; p < 0.001), while the proportion of invasive procedures performed for abnormal ultrasound increased from 2.2% in 1991 to 51.6% in 2016 (OR 1.9 for each 5 years; p < 0.001). Abnormal karyotype was found in 9.7%. The proportion of abnormal karyotypes increased significantly from 0.0% in 1991 to 15.7% in 2016 (OR 1.35 for each 5-year period; p < 0.001). The odds of abnormal karyotype increased after the implementation of the Ordinance of the Minister of Health in 2003 (OR 1.6), the National Prenatal Screening Program in 2007 (OR 2.2), and the in-house genetic counseling with combined first trimester screening in 2015 (OR 3.1). CONCLUSIONS: Significant changes in prenatal diagnosis led to a better selection of patients undergoing invasive prenatal procedures. The implementation of in-house genetic counseling was associated with an increased rate of the detection of abnormal karyotypes.

A rare case of NIPT discrepancy caused by the placental mosaicism of three different karyotypes, 47,XXX, 47,XX,+21, and 48,XXX,+21.

BACKGROUND: Placental mosaicism is one of the major reasons for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) discrepancy. Herein, we discovered a rare case of placenta with complex karyotypes that caused false-positive and false-negative results in noninvasive prenatal testing. METHODS: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and Quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) were performed on the cord blood sample, fetal tissues, and eight placental biopsies. Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH) and karyotyping were also carried to confirm the fetal genome status. RESULTS: The results suggested that the fetal chromosome was 47,XXX and the placenta had three karyotypes of 48,XXX,+21, 47,XX,+21, and 47,XXX. QF-PCR indicated that the extra chromosome 21 and chromosome X were all from the father. It is speculated that the zygote may have 48,XXX,+21 karyotype and trisomy rescue could be the main mechanism for the development of the homogeneous fetus and complex mosaic placenta. CONCLUSION: Overall, the complicated nature of our case underlines the importance of discussing with parents the possibility of both atypical and discordant results during preconfirmatory amniocentesis counseling and consent.

Clinical application of chromosomal microarray analysis in fetuses with increased nuchal translucency and normal karyotype.

BACKGROUND: Submicroscopic chromosomal imbalance is associated with an increased nuchal translucency (NT). Most previous research has recommended the use of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis if the NT ≥ 3.5 mm. However, there is no current global consensus on the cutoff value for CMA. In this study, we aimed to discuss the fetuses with smaller increased NT which was between cutoff value of NT for karyotype analysis (NT of 2.5 mm in China) and the recommended cutoff value for CMA (NT of 3.5 mm) whether should be excluded from CMA test. METHODS: Singleton pregnant women (N = 192) who had undergone invasive procedures owing to an increased NT (NT ≥ 2.5 mm) were enrolled. Fetal cells were collected and subjected to single nucleotide polymorphism array and karyotype analyses simultaneously. Cases were excluded if the karyotype analysis indicated aneuploidy and apparent structural aberrations. RESULTS: Fourteen cases of aneuploidy and four cases of structural abnormalities were excluded. Of the remaining 174 cases, 119 fetuses had NTs of 2.5-3.4 mm, and 55 fetuses with NT ≥ 3.5 mm. Eleven copy number variants (CNVs) were identified. In fetuses with smaller NTs, six (6/119, 5.9%) variations were detected, including two (2/119, 1.6%) clinically significant CNVs (pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNV), one  likely benign CNV, two variants unknown significance, and one incidental CNV. Five (5/55, 9.1%) variations were found in fetuses with NT ≥ 3.5 mm. Among these CNVs, three (3/55, 5.5%) cases had clinically significant CNVs, and two had likely benign CNV. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of all CNVs and clinically significant CNVs in the two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: CMA improved the diagnostic yield of chromosomal aberrations for fetuses with NTs of 2.5-3.4 mm and apparently normal karyotype, regardless of whether other ultrasonic abnormalities were observed.

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.

Karyotype of the blastocoel fluid demonstrates low concordance with both trophectoderm and inner cell mass.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the genomic profiles of blastocoel fluid (BF), inner cell mass (ICM), and trophectoderm (TE) cells derived from the same blastocyst. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Academic and in vitro fertilization units. PATIENT(S): Sixteen donated cryopreserved embryos at blastocyst stage. INTERVENTION(S): BF, TE, and ICM cells were retrieved from each blastocyst for chromosome analysis by means of next-generation sequencing (NGS). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Aneuploidy screening and assessment of mosaicism in BF, TE and ICM samples with subsequent comparison of genomic profiles between the three blastocyst compartments. RESULT(S): Out of 16 blastocysts, 10 BF samples and 14 TE and ICM samples provided reliable NGS data for comprehensive chromosome analysis. Only 40.0% of BF-DNA karyotypes were fully concordant with TE or ICM, compared with 85.7% concordance between TE and ICM. In addition, BF-DNA was burdened with mosaic aneuploidies and the total number of affected chromosomes in BF was significantly higher compared with the TE and ICM. CONCLUSION(S): BF-DNA can be successfully amplified and subjected to NGS, but owing to increased discordance with ICM and TE, BF does not adequately represent the status of the rest of the embryo. To overcome biologic and technical challenges associated with BF sampling and processing, blastocentesis would require improvement in both laboratory protocols and aneuploidy calling algorithms. Therefore, TE biopsy remains the most effective way to predict embryonic karyotype, and the use of BF as a single source of DNA for preimplantation genetic screening is not yet advised.

Karyomapping and how is it improving preimplantation genetics?

INTRODUCTION: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening (PGD/PGS) has been applied clinically for >25 years however inherent drawbacks include the necessity to tailor each case to the trait in question, and that technology to detect monogenic and chromosomal disorders respectively is fundamentally different. Areas covered: The area of preimplantation genetics has evolved over the last 25 years, adapting to changes in technology and the need for more efficient, streamlined diagnoses. Karyomapping allows the determination of inheritance from the (grand)parental haplobocks through assembly of inherited chromosomal segments. The output displays homologous chromosomes, crossovers and the genetic status of the embryos by linkage comparison, as well as chromosomal disorders. It also allows for determination of heterozygous SNP calls, avoiding the risks of allele dropout, a common problem with other PGD techniques. Manuscripts documenting the evolution of preimplantation genetics, especially those investigating technologies that would simultaneously detect monogenic and chromosomal disorders, were selected for review. Expert commentary: Karyomapping is currently available for detection of single gene disorders; ~1000 clinics worldwide offer it (via ~20 diagnostic laboratories) and ~2500 cases have been performed. Due an inability to detect post-zygotic trisomy reliably however and confounding problems of embryo mosaicism, karyomapping has yet to be applied clinically for detection of chromosome disorders.

Cytogenetics in the management of children and adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL): an update by the Groupe francophone de cytogénétique hématologique (GFCH).

Cytogenetic analyses (karyotype and, if necessary, appropriate complementary FISH analyses) are mandatory at diagnosis in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) as their results are taken into account in therapeutic protocols due to their diagnostic and prognostic values. In some cases, karyotype can be completed by other techniques (RT-PCR, RQ-PCR, DNA content, SNP-array, MLPA…) that can be equally or more informative than FISH. Here, we have tempted to establish guidelines concerning karyotype and FISH analyses according to the most recent data of the litterature which is reviewed here, completing the 2008 WHO classification with the recent new cytogenomic entities such as Ph-like ALL and indicating possible therapeutic implications.

[Result survey analysis of prenatal chromosome karyotyping in an external quality assessment program].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of prenatal karyotype of the external quality assessment program in 2013 in order to provide references and recommendations for improving the capability and performances of karyotype analysis of prenatal screening laboratories. METHODS: Five lots of quality control cell photos were sent to 500 laboratories. The participants were asked to decide whether the photos have demonstrated any abnormal karyotype and determine the abnormal type. The results should be submitted before the deadline and compared with the standard results to evaluate the performances of the laboratory. RESULTS: One hundred forty three laboratories have returned their karyotype results for the survey. The standard answers were 7,XX,+18, 46,X,i(X)(q10), 46,XY,i(21)(q10) or 46,XY,+21,der(21;21)(q10;q10), 46,XY and 47,XY,+21 in sequential order, which were used to estimate the score of each participant. The pass rates for five lots were 97.9%, 97.2%, 95.8%, 100.0% and 97.9%, respectively. The total pass rate was 97.7%. The error rates were 2.1%, 2.8%, 4.2%, 0 and 2.1%, respectively. The total error rate was 2.3%. CONCLUSION: Some laboratories did not correctly identify the abnormal karyotypes, while some could not determine the right type of karyotype. The external quality assessment program of prenatal diagnosis of karyotype analysis should be conducted annually in order to improve the capability and performances of karyotype analysis of prenatal screening laboratories.

Rescue karyotyping: a case series of array-based comparative genomic hybridization evaluation of archival conceptual tissue.

BACKGROUND: Determination of fetal aneuploidy is central to evaluation of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). However, obtaining this information at the time of a miscarriage is not always possible or may not have been ordered. Here we report on "rescue karyotyping", wherein DNA extracted from archived paraffin-embedded pregnancy loss tissue from a prior dilation and curettage (D&C) is evaluated by array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH). METHODS: A retrospective case series was conducted at an academic medical center. Patients included had unexplained RPL and a prior pregnancy loss for which karyotype information would be clinically informative but was unavailable. After extracting DNA from slides of archived tissue, aCGH with a reduced stringency approach was performed, allowing for analysis of partially degraded DNA. Statistics were computed using STATA v12.1 (College Station, TX). RESULTS: Rescue karyotyping was attempted on 20 specimens from 17 women. DNA was successfully extracted in 16 samples (80.0%), enabling analysis at either high or low resolution. The longest interval from tissue collection to DNA extraction was 4.2 years. There was no significant difference in specimen sufficiency for analysis in the collection-to-extraction interval (p=0.14) or gestational age at pregnancy loss (p=0.32). Eight specimens showed copy number variants: 3 trisomies, 2 partial chromosomal deletions, 1 mosaic abnormality and 2 unclassified variants. CONCLUSIONS: Rescue karyotyping using aCGH on DNA extracted from paraffin-embedded tissue provides the opportunity to obtain critical fetal cytogenetic information from a prior loss, even if it occurred years earlier. Given the ubiquitous archiving of paraffin embedded tissue obtained during a D&C and the ease of obtaining results despite long loss-to-testing intervals or early gestational age at time of fetal demise, this may provide a useful technique in the evaluation of couples with recurrent pregnancy loss.

Replacing the combined test by cell-free DNA testing in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13: impact on the diagnosis of other chromosomal abnormalities.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the proportion of other chromosomal abnormalities that could be missed if combined testing was replaced by cell-free (cf) DNA testing as the method of screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13. METHODS: The prevalence of trisomies 21, 18 or 13, sex chromosome aneuploidies, triploidy and other chromosomal abnormalities was examined in pregnancies undergoing first-trimester combined screening and chorionic villus sampling (CVS). RESULTS: In 1,831 clinically significant chromosomal abnormalities in pregnancies with combined risk for trisomies 21, 18 and 13≥1:100, the contribution of trisomies 21, 18 or 13, sex chromosome aneuploidies, triploidy and other chromosomal abnormalities at high risk of adverse outcome was 82.9, 8.2, 3.9 and 5.0%, respectively. Combined screening followed by CVS for risk≥1:10 and cfDNA testing for risk 1:11-1:2,500 could detect 97% of trisomy 21 and 98% of trisomies 18 and 13. Additionally, 86% of monosomy X, half of 47,XXY, 47,XYY or 47,XXX, half of other chromosomal abnormalities and one third of triploidies, which are currently detected by combined screening and CVS for risk≥1:100, could be detected. CONCLUSIONS: Screening by cfDNA testing, contingent on results of combined testing, improves detection of trisomies, but misses a few of the other chromosomal abnormalities detected by screening with the combined test.

The interpretation and analysis of cytogenetic data.

Chromosome aberration analysis has been the basis of one of core tests in genetic toxicology since guidelines were first established (DHSS (1981) Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals for Mutagenicity. Prepared by the Committee on Mutagenicity of Chemcials in Food, Consumer Products, and the Environment, Department of Health and Social Security. Report on Health and Social Subjects, No. 24. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London; IPCS (1985) Guide to short-term tests for detecting mutagenic and carcinogenic chemicals prepared for the IPCS by the International Commission for Protection against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. Geneva, WHO). The technique consists of microscope examination of preparations of chromosomes, usually mammalian, for clastogenicity (chromosome breakage events), and agents which induce such changes are considered genotoxic.There are a number of different types of aberrations, and within types, considerable variation in their appearance. This chapter addresses aberration classification, their appearance, frequency and fate, and the range within aberration types, potential mis-classifications, and data recording and interpretation.

Clinical validity of karyotyping for the diagnosis of chromosomal imbalance following array comparative genomic hybridisation.

BACKGROUND: Array comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH) represents a major advance in the ability to detect chromosomal imbalances (CI). A recent meta-analysis recommended aCGH for replacing karyotyping for patients with unexplained disabilities. However, favouring aCGH over karyotyping must be based on solid evidence due to the major implications of selecting a preferential diagnostic tool. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective study of 376 samples was conducted to assess the relevance of karyotyping after a first-tier aCGH in patients with unexplained disabilities. aCGH detected CI in 28.7% of the cases. Out of 376 patients, 288 had undergone parallel karyotyping testing: 69.8% (201/288) showed similar results for both aCGH and karyotyping. For patients with a CI detected by aCGH, 7.9% (7/89) showed similar results for both aCGH and karyotyping. Among 20 patients with abnormal karyotyping, 13 showed dissimilar results compared to aCGH analysis: 4 patients (1.4%) had balanced rearrangements and 9 patients (3.1%) had additional chromosomal anomalies unseen using aCGH. This rate of unseen chromosomal anomalies is far superior to the previously estimated 0.5-0.78% prevalence and affects 10.1% (9/89) of patients with CI detected by aCGH in the tested population. CONCLUSIONS: Since the clinical significance of CI identified by aCGH might be influenced by such discrepancies between the two methods, these may in turn have an impact on clinical diagnosis and patient counselling. It is proposed that each genetic laboratory should evaluate the relevance of karyotyping for all first-tier abnormal aCGH results in order to include the genomic (chromosomal) aspects of the aCGH findings in the diagnosis.