Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Validation and Diagnostic Utility of Optical Genome Mapping in Prenatal Diagnostic Testing.
Sahajpal, Nikhil S; Mondal, Ashis K; Fee, Timothy; Hilton, Benjamin; Layman, Lawrence; Hastie, Alex R; Chaubey, Alka; DuPont, Barbara R; Kolhe, Ravindra.
Afiliação
  • Sahajpal NS; Cytogenetics Laboratory, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
  • Mondal AK; Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia.
  • Fee T; Cytogenetics Laboratory, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
  • Hilton B; Cytogenetics Laboratory, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
  • Layman L; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia.
  • Hastie AR; Bionano Genomics, San Diego, California.
  • Chaubey A; Bionano Genomics, San Diego, California.
  • DuPont BR; Cytogenetics Laboratory, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, South Carolina.
  • Kolhe R; Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. Electronic address: rkolhe@augusta.edu.
J Mol Diagn ; 25(4): 234-246, 2023 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36758723
ABSTRACT
The standard-of-care diagnostic prenatal testing includes a combination of cytogenetic methods, such as karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and chromosomal microarray (CMA), using either direct or cultured amniocytes or chorionic villi sampling. However, each technology has its

limitations:

karyotyping has a low resolution (>5 Mb), FISH is targeted, and CMA does not detect balanced structural variations (SVs). These limitations necessitate the use of multiple tests, either simultaneously or sequentially, to reach a genetic diagnosis. Optical genome mapping (OGM) is an emerging technology that can detect several classes of SVs in a single assay, but it has not been evaluated in the prenatal setting. This validation study analyzed 114 samples that were received in our laboratory for traditional cytogenetic analysis with karyotyping, FISH, and/or CMA. OGM was 100% concordant in identifying the 101 aberrations that included 29 interstitial/terminal deletions, 28 duplications, 26 aneuploidies, 6 absence of heterozygosity regions, 3 triploid genomes, 4 isochromosomes, and 1 translocation; and the method revealed the identity of 3 marker chromosomes and 1 chromosome with additional material not determined by karyotyping. In addition, OGM detected 64 additional clinically reportable SVs in 43 samples. OGM has a standardized laboratory workflow and reporting solution that can be adopted in routine clinical laboratories and demonstrates the potential to replace the current standard-of-care methods for prenatal diagnostic testing.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Transtornos Cromossômicos / Aneuploidia Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Transtornos Cromossômicos / Aneuploidia Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article