Article

Diagnostic utility of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in a prenatal setting.

The Raphael Recanati Genetic Institute, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva, Israel.
Prenatal Diagnosis (Impact Factor: 2.68). 10/2010; 30(12-13):1131-7. DOI: 10.1002/pd.2626
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) is a new technique for detecting submicroscopic deletions and duplications. There is limited information regarding its use in the prenatal setting. Here, we present our experience of 269 prenatal aCGHs between 2006 and 2009.
The indications for testing were fetal anomalies on ultrasound (U/S), advanced maternal age (AMA), family history of a disorder of unknown etiology, parental concern, abnormal routine karyotype and abnormal serum biochemical screening for common fetal aneuploidies.
Of 15 cases with a known abnormal karyotype, 11 had a normal aCGH. This enabled us to reassure the families and the pregnancies were continued. The remaining four showed an abnormal aCGH, confirming the chromosomes were unbalanced, and were terminated. Of 254 cases with a normal karyotype, 3 had an abnormal aCGH and were terminated. Overall, new clinically relevant results were detected by aCGH in 18 cases, providing additional information for prenatal genetic counseling and risk assessment.
Our results suggest that prenatal aCGH should be offered particularly in cases with abnormal U/S. We found the rate of detecting an abnormality by aCGH in low-risk pregnancies was 1:84, but larger studies will be needed to expand our knowledge and validate our conclusions.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
129 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since the seventies genome wide cytogenetic testing by using karyotyping has been a basic genetic examination. Recently a higher resolution DNA microarray technology was developed. Based on a literature review we give an overview of the current status and the advantages of the use of whole genome array diagnostics for routine prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis. Array testing is now commonly used for cytogenetic prenatal diagnosis in cases of ultrasound anomalies, but is not routinely implemented for all indications due to the absence of an internationally accepted policy how to deal with problematic copy number variants (CNVs) such as variants of unknown clinical significance (VOUS), susceptibility loci for neurodevelopmental disorders (SL) and unexpected diagnoses. There is also no consensus about offering patients choices on predefined outcome categories during pre-test counseling. If the patient wishes genome wide testing and is willing to take the risk of an invasive procedure, whole array testing may replace karyotyping if assisted by genetic counseling. In this review we advocate, based on literature and our experience that the advantages of whole genome array as a first-tier diagnostic prenatal test largely overweighs its disadvantages. However, there is still need for a policy on what to report, especially because new challenges, like the feasibility of fetal whole genome screening for both CNV and mutations in maternal plasma, are to be expected coming up in the near future. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 12/2014; · 3.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When congenital anomalies are diagnosed on prenatal ultrasound, the current standard of care is to perform G-banded karyotyping on cultured amniotic cells. Chromosomal microarray (CMA) can detect smaller genomic deletions and duplications than traditional karyotype analysis. CMA is the first-tier test in the postnatal evaluation of children with multiple congenital anomalies. Recent studies have demonstrated the utility of CMA in the prenatal setting and have advocated for widespread implementation of this technology as the preferred test in prenatal diagnosis. However, CMA remains significantly more expensive than karyotype. In this study, we performed an economic analysis of cytogenetic technologies in the prenatal diagnosis of sonographically detected fetal anomalies comparing four strategies: (i) karyotype alone, (ii) CMA alone, (iii) karyotype and CMA, and (iv) karyotype followed by CMA if the karyotype was normal. In a theoretical cohort of 1,000 patients, CMA alone and karyotype followed by CMA if the karyotype was normal identified a similar number of chromosomal abnormalities. In this model, CMA alone was the most cost-effective strategy, although karyotype alone and CMA following a normal karyotype are both acceptable alternatives. This study supports the clinical utility of CMA in the prenatal diagnosis of sonographically detected fetal anomalies. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 03/2014; · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Array-based comparative genomic hybridization possesses a number of significant advantages over conventional cytogenetic and other molecular cytogenetic techniques, providing a sensitive and comprehensive detection platform for unexpected imbalances in the genome wide. The newborn proband, demonstrated with craniofacial dysmorphism and multiple malformations, was born to a family with spontaneous abortions. This pregnancy was uneventful, except the prenatal ultrasound examination showed an increased nuchal translucency at 12+ weeks of gestation. Cytogenetics revealed an apparently normal karyotype, and the couple decided to continue the pregnancy. Array-based CGH analysis was applied to the affected infant, identified a combination of 18p deletion and 7q duplication. Further study indicates that the unbalanced translocation was inherited from a balanced translocation carrier parent. In review of the case, several overlooked points leading to the missed diagnosis should be discussed and certain quality control strategies should be adopted to avoid similar problems in the future. Array-based CGH and karyotyping techniques are complemented by diverse detection spectrum and resolutions, and a combination of these methods could help providing optimal genetic diagnosis. Given that the array-CGH analysis will not introduce additional risk to patients, it is reasonable to recommend those already undergoing invasive testing should take array-based CGH as an adjunct to conventional cytogenetic tests and other molecular cytogenetic analysis.
    Molecular Cytogenetics 04/2014; 7(1):26. · 2.66 Impact Factor