Quantitative fluorescence PCR analysis of >40 000 prenatal samples for the rapid diagnosis of trisomies 13, 18 and 21 and monosomy X

Accuracy and depth evaluation of clinical low pass genome sequencing in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and CNVs

BACKGROUND

Low-pass genome sequencing (LP GS) has shown distinct advantages over traditional methods for the detection of mosaicism. However, no study has systematically evaluated the accuracy of LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and copy number variants (CNVs) in prenatal diagnosis. Moreover, the influence of sequencing depth on mosaicism detection of LP GS has not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

To evaluate the accuracy of LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and mosaic CNVs, 27 samples with known aneuploidies and CNVs and 1 negative female sample were used to generate 6 simulated samples and 21 virtual samples, each sample contained 9 different mosaic levels. Mosaic levels were simulated by pooling reads or DNA from each positive sample and the negative sample according to a series of percentages (ranging from 3 to 40%). Then, the influence of sequencing depth on LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and CNVs was evaluated by downsampling.

RESULTS

To evaluate the accuracy of LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and CNVs, a comparative analysis of mosaic levels was performed using 6 simulated samples and 21 virtual samples with 35 M million (M) uniquely aligned high-quality reads (UAHRs). For mosaic levels > 30%, the average difference (detected mosaic levels vs. theoretical mosaic levels) of 6 mosaic CNVs in simulated samples was 4.0%, and the average difference (detected mosaic levels vs. mosaic levels of Y chromosome) of 6 mosaic aneuploidies and 15 mosaic CNVs in virtual samples was 2.7%. Furthermore, LP GS had a higher detection rate and accuracy for the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and CNVs of larger sizes, especially mosaic aneuploidies. For depth evaluation, the results of LP GS in downsampling samples were compared with those of LP GS using 35 M UAHRs. The detection sensitivity of LP GS for 6 mosaic aneuploidies and 15 mosaic CNVs in virtual samples increased with UAHR. For mosaic levels > 30%, the total detection sensitivity reached a plateau at 30 M UAHRs. With 30 M UAHRs, the total detection sensitivity was 99.2% for virtual samples.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the accuracy of LP GS in mosaicism detection using simulated data and virtual samples, respectively. Thirty M UAHRs (single-end 35 bp) were optimal for LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and most mosaic CNVs larger than 1.48 Mb (Megabases) with mosaic levels > 30%. These results could provide a reference for laboratories that perform clinical LP GS in the detection of mosaic aneuploidies and CNVs.

Clinical and molecular cytogenetic findings and pregnancy outcomes of fetuses with isochromosome Y

BACKGROUND

The mosaic forms and clinical phenotypes of fetuses with isochromosome Y are difficult to predict. Therefore, we summarized the cases of nine fetuses with isochromosome Y identified in prenatal diagnosis with a combination of molecular cytogenetic techniques, providing clinical evidence for prenatal genetic counseling.

METHODS

The prenatal diagnosis and pregnancy outcomes of nine fetuses with isochromosome Y were obtained by a  retrospective analysis. Isochromosome Y was identified prenatally by different approaches, such as conventional karyotyping, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).

RESULTS

Seven idic(Y) fetuses and two i(Y) fetuses were identified. One fetus was complete for i(Y)(p10), and the rest with 45,X had mosaic forms. A break and fusion locus was identified in Yp11.3 in one fetus, in Yq11.22 in six fetuses and in Yp10 in two fetuses. The CMA results suggested that different deletions and duplications were found on the Y chromosome. The deletion fragments ranged from 4.7 Mb to the entire Y chromosome, and the duplication fragments ranged from 10.4 to 18.0 Mb. QF-PCR analysis suggested that the AZF region was intact in one fetus, four fetuses had AZFb+c+d deletion, one fetus had AZFa+b+c+d deletion, and one fetus had AZFc+d deletion. Finally, four healthy male neonates were delivered successfully, but the parents of the remaining five fetuses, including three healthy and two unhealthy fetuses, chose to terminate their pregnancies.

CONCLUSION

The fetus and neonate phenotype of prenatally detected isochromosome Y usually is that of a normally developed male, ascertained in the absence of other indicators of a fetal structural anomaly. Our study provides clinical reference materials for risk assessment and permits better prenatally counseling and preparation of parents facing the birth of isochromosome Y fetuses.

The Use of Genetics for Reaching a Diagnosis in XY DSD

Reaching a firm diagnosis is vital for the long-term management of a patient with a difference or disorder of sex development (DSD). This is especially the case in XY DSD where the diagnostic yield is particularly low. Molecular genetic technology is playing an increasingly important role in the diagnostic process, and it is highly likely that it will be used more often at an earlier stage in the diagnostic process. In many cases of DSD, the clinical utility of molecular genetics is unequivocally clear, but in many other cases there is a need for careful exploration of the benefit of genetic diagnosis through long-term monitoring of these cases. Furthermore, the incorporation of molecular genetics into the diagnostic process requires a careful appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses of the evolving technology, and the interpretation of the results requires a clear understanding of the wide range of conditions that are associated with DSD.

Different Strategies of Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidies in Women of Advanced Maternal Age: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) is widely used in women of advanced maternal age (AMA). However, the effectiveness remains controversial. Method: We conducted a comprehensive literature review comparing outcomes of IVF with or without PGT-A in women of AMA in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in January 2021. All included trials met the criteria that constituted a randomized controlled trial for PGT-A involving women of AMA (≥35 years). Reviews, conference abstracts, and observational studies were excluded. The primary outcome was the live birth rate in included random control trials (RCTs). Results: Nine randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. For techniques of genetic analysis, three trials (270 events) performed with comprehensive chromosomal screening showed that the live birth rate was significantly higher in the women randomized to IVF/ICSI with PGT-A (RR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.03–1.65), which was not observed in six trials used with FISH as well as all nine trials. For different stages of embryo biopsy, only the subgroup of blastocyst biopsy showed a higher live birth rate in women with PGT-A (RR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.04–1.79). Conclusion: The application of comprehensive chromosome screening showed a beneficial effect of PGT-A in women of AMA compared with FISH. Moreover, blastocyst biopsy seemed to be associated with a better outcome than polar body biopsy and cleavage-stage biopsy.

Multilevel regression modeling for aneuploidy classification and physical separation of maternal cell contamination facilitates the QF-PCR based analysis of common fetal aneuploidies

Background

The quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) has proven to be a reliable method for detection of common fetal chromosomal aneuploidies. However, there are some technical shortcomings, such as uncertainty of aneuploidy determination when the short tandem repeats (STR) height ratio is unusual due to a large size difference between alleles or failure due to the presence of maternal cell contamination (MCC). The aim of our study is to facilitate the implementation of the QF-PCR as a rapid diagnostic test for common fetal aneuploidies.

Methods

Here, we describe an in-house one-tube multiplex QF-PCR method including 20 PCR markers (15 STR markers and 5 fixed size) for rapid prenatal diagnosis of chromosome 13, 18, 21, X and Y aneuploidies. In order to improve the aneuploidy classification of a given diallelic STR marker, we have employed a multilevel logistic regression analysis using "height-ratio" and "allele-size-difference" as fixed effects and "marker" as a random effect. We employed two regression models, one for the 2:1 height ratio (n = 48 genotypes) and another for the 1:2 height ratio (n = 41 genotypes) of the trisomic diallelic markers while using the same 9015 genotypes with normal 1:1 height ratio in both models. Furthermore, we have described a simple procedure for the treatment of the MCC, prior DNA isolation and QF-PCR analysis.

Results

For both models, we have achieved 100% specificity for the marker aneuploidy classification as compared to 98.60% (2:1 ratio) and 98.04% (1:2 ratio) specificity when using only the height ratio for classification. Treatment of the MCC enables a successful diagnosis rate of 76% among truly contaminated amniotic fluids.

Conclusions

Adjustment for the allele size difference and marker type improves the STR aneuploidy classification, which, complemented with appropriate treatment of contaminated amniotic fluids, eliminates sample re-testing and reinforces the robustness of the QF-PCR method for prenatal testing.

Discrepancy of QF-PCR, CMA and karyotyping on a de novo case of mosaic isodicentric Y chromosomes

Background

Isodicentric chromosomes are the most frequent structural aberrations of human Y chromosome, and usually present in mosaicism with a 45, X cell line. Several cytogenetic techniques have been used for diagnosing of uncommon abnormal sex chromosome abnormalities in prenatal cases.

Case presentation

A 26-year-old healthy woman was referred to our centre at 24 weeks of gestation age. Ultrasound examination indicated she was pregnant with imbalanced development of twins. Amniocentesis was referred to the patient for further genetic analyses. Quantitative Fluorescent Polymerase Chain Reaction (QF-PCR) indicated the existence of an extra Y chromosome or a structurally abnormal Y chromosome in primary amniotic cells. Chromosome microarray (CMA) analysis based on Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) platform was performed and identified a 10.1 Mb deletion on Y chromosome in 8-days cultured amniotic cells. Combined with the data of QF-PCR and aCGH, karyotyping and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) revealed a mosaic cell line of 45,X[27]/46,X, idic(Y)(q11.22) [14] in fetus.The karyotyping analysis of cord blood sample was consistent with amniotic cells. The parental karyotypes were normal, which indicated this mosaic case of isodicentric Y (idicY) chromosomes of the fetus was a de novo case.

Conclusion

Several approaches have been used for the detection of numerical and structural chromosomal alterations of on prenatal cases. Our report supported the essential role of incorporating multiple genetic techniques in prenatal diagnosing and genetic counseling of potential complex sex chromosomal rearrangements.

Prenatal Detection of Chromosome Aneuploidy by Quantitative Fluorescence PCR

Autosomal chromosome aneuploid pregnancies that survive to term, namely, trisomies 13, 18, and 21, account for 89% of chromosome abnormalities with a severe phenotype identified in prenatal samples. They are traditionally detected by full karyotype analysis of cultured cells. The average reporting time for a prenatal karyotype analysis is approximately 14 days, and in recent years, there has been increasing demand for more rapid prenatal results with respect to the common chromosome aneuploidies, to relieve maternal anxiety and facilitate options in pregnancy. The rapid tests that have been developed negate the requirement for cultured cells, instead directly testing cells from the amniotic fluid or chorionic villus sample, with the aim of generating results within 48 h of sample receipt. Interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization is the method of choice in some genetic laboratories, usually because the expertise and equipment are readily available. However, a quantitative fluorescence (QF)-PCR-based approach is now widely used and reported as a clinical diagnostic service in many studies. It may be used as a stand-alone test or as an adjunct test to full karyotype or array CGH analysis, which scan for other chromosome abnormalities not detected by the QF-PCR assay.

Validation of QF-PCR for prenatal diagnoses in a Brazilian population

OBJECTIVES:

Quantitative fluorescence polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) is a rapid and reliable method for screening aneuploidies, but in Brazil, it is not used in public services. We investigated the accuracy of QF-PCR for the prenatal recognition of common aneuploidies and compared these results with cytogenetic results in our laboratory.

METHOD:

A ChromoQuant QF-PCR kit containing 24 primer pairs targeting loci on chromosomes 21, 13, 18, X and Y was employed to identify aneuploidies of the referred chromosomes.

RESULTS:

A total of 162 amniotic fluid samples analyzed using multiplex QF-PCR were compared with karyotyping analysis. The QF-PCR results were consistent with the results of cytogenetic analysis in 95.4% of all samples.

CONCLUSION:

QF-PCR was demonstrated to be efficient and reliable for prenatal aneuploidy screening. This study suggests that QF-PCR can be used as a rapid diagnostic method. However, rearrangements and some mosaic samples cannot be detected with this test; thus, those exceptions must undergo cytogenetic analysis.

Efficient and cost-effective genetic analysis of products of conception and fetal tissues using a QF-PCR/array CGH strategy; five years of data

BACKGROUND

Traditional testing of miscarriage products involved culture of tissue followed by G-banded chromosome analysis; this approach has a high failure rate, is labour intensive and has a resolution of around 10 Mb. G-banded chromosome analysis has been replaced by molecular techniques in some laboratories; we previously introduced a QF-PCR/MLPA testing strategy in 2007. To improve diagnostic yield and efficiency we have now updated our testing strategy to a more comprehensive QF-PCR assay followed by array CGH. Here we describe the results from the last 5 years of service.

METHODS

Fetal tissue samples and products of conception were tested using QF-PCR which will detect aneuploidy for chromosomes 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, X and Y. Samples that were normal were then tested by aCGH and all imbalance >1Mb and fully penetrant clinically significant imbalance <1Mb was reported.

RESULTS

QF-PCR analysis identified aneuploidy/triploidy in 25.6% of samples. aCGH analysis detected imbalance in a further 9.6% of samples; this included 1.8% with submicroscopic imbalance and 0.5% of uncertain clinical significance. This approach has a failure rate of 1.4%, compared to 30% for G-banded chromosome analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This efficient QF-PCR/aCGH strategy has a lower failure rate and higher diagnostic yield than karyotype or MLPA strategies; both findings are welcome developments for couples with recurrent miscarriage.

Performance of QF-PCR in targeted prenatal aneuploidy diagnosis: Indian scenario

OBJECTIVE

Among the rapid aneuploidy detection methods, QF-PCR has now become an alternative tool for prenatal aneuploidy diagnosis concomitant with karyotyping. This method has been validated in many of the western clinics but in India no study was conducted to assess its utility as standalone procedure. The study was designed to answer the question whether QF-PCR can be implemented as a standalone diagnostic method for rapid aneuploidy diagnosis in our present clinical setup?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study was conducted during March 2012 to August 2014 consisting of 270 prenatal samples that underwent for aneuploidy diagnosis. In addition to karyotyping, QF-PCR was also performed on these samples and the results were compared.

RESULTS

Of 270 samples screened, 262 samples showed euploid genome (125 normal male and 137 normal female). Eight samples were consistent with aneuploidy--four trisomy 21 male sample, 2 trisomy 21 female sample, 1 trisomy 18 samples and 1 Klinefelter sample. The specificity, sensitivity, positive prediction value and negative prediction values were 100% while false positive rate and false negative rate were 0%.

CONCLUSION

Outcome of this study strongly suggests that QF-PCR can be used as standalone procedure for targeted rapid aneuploidy diagnosis.

Dilemmas in Prenatal Chromosomal Diagnosis Revealed Through a Single Center's 30 Years' Experience and 90,000 Cases

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this article is to provide a perspective of prenatal chromosomal diagnosis (PCD) derived from a single center's evolving experience from ∼90,000 consecutive prenatal cases and to highlight important issues and current dilemmas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prenatal cases in this study (1985-2013) were referred for various indications, and PCD was performed by standard karyotype in 84,255 cases, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) panel in 3,010 cases and standalone array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in 3,122 cases.

RESULTS

Classic karyotype revealed 1.7 and 7.9% of pathological cases in amniotic fluid and CVS samples, respectively, with common aneuploidies accounting for 59.6 and 64.3% of the total abnormal. Molecular approaches increased the diagnostic yield by 0.6% for MLPA and 1.6% for aCGH, uncovering pathogenic chromosomal abnormalities undetectable by karyotype analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Current molecular diagnostic capabilities and the recent introduction of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) point to one current major dilemma in PCD, with serious implications in genetic counseling, relating on the one hand to reaping the benefits from the high detection rate afforded through aCGH but accepting an invasive risk, and on the other hand, offering a lower detection rate practically only for Down syndrome, with minimal invasive risk.

Microarray Technology for the Diagnosis of Fetal Chromosomal Aberrations: Which Platform Should We Use?

The advantage of microarray (array) over conventional karyotype for the diagnosis of fetal pathogenic chromosomal anomalies has prompted the use of microarrays in prenatal diagnostics. In this review we compare the performance of different array platforms (BAC, oligonucleotide CGH, SNP) and designs (targeted, whole genome, whole genome, and targeted, custom) and discuss their advantages and disadvantages in relation to prenatal testing. We also discuss the factors to consider when implementing a microarray testing service for the diagnosis of fetal chromosomal aberrations.

Chromosome aberrations identified by cytogenetic analysis of the first two clones of cultured amniotic fluid cells compared with QF-PCR results

We report on our experience of studying amniotic fluid cells by cytogenetic analysis (CA) of the first 2 clones. We investigated the incidence and types of chromosome aberrations detected by CA of 196 amniocenteses performed on pregnant women at high risk. Of these cases, 178 were analysed by QF-PCR (risk group A). The results were compared with the data obtained by CA of 1,263 amniocenteses carried out in patients with other indications. QF-PCR was used to investigate 1,030 of these cases (risk group B). The combined average turnaround time for a CA result of the first 2 clones in both risk groups was within 9 ± 2 days. The final CA results (≥6 clones) were obtained within 12 ± 4 days. In risk group A, CA was not possible in 2 cases due to cell culture failure. The foetal karyotype was abnormal in 13.8% of the cases by CA of ≥6 clones and in 13.5% of the cases by QF-PCR. Together, CA of ≥6 clones and QF-PCR detected chromosome aberrations in 14.8% of the cases. With the exception of 2 cases of in vitro culture failure and 1 case with low gonosomal mosaicism, CA of the first 2 clones detected all cases with chromosome aberrations. Five cases with clinically significant chromosome aberrations were not detected by QF-PCR. In risk group B, the foetal karyotype was found to be abnormal in 2.2% of the cases by CA of ≥6 clones and in 1.0% of the cases by QF-PCR. Together, CA of ≥6 clones and QF-PCR revealed chromosome aberrations in 2.2% of the cases. With the exception of 1 case with low gonosomal mosaicism, CA of the first 2 clones detected all other cases with chromosome aberrations. The majority of these cases were inherited chromosome aberrations. Eighteen cases with chromosome aberrations were not detected by QF-PCR. Based on our results, CA of ≥6 clones, together with QF-PCR as a first test, should be performed in all prenatal cases with abnormal ultrasound findings. In pregnancies with other indications, CA of the first 2 clones alone is sufficient to identify all clinically significant (and inherited) chromosome aberrations.

Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy: current status and future prospects

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy using cell-free DNA in maternal plasma is revolutionizing prenatal screening and diagnosis. We review NIPT in the context of established screening and invasive technologies, the range of cytogenetic abnormalities detectable, cost, counseling and ethical issues. Current NIPT approaches involve whole-genome sequencing, targeted sequencing and assessment of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) differences between mother and fetus. Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of NIPT for Down and Edwards syndromes, and possibly Patau syndrome, in high-risk women. Universal NIPT is not cost-effective, but using NIPT contingently in women found at moderate or high risk by conventional screening is cost-effective. Positive NIPT results must be confirmed using invasive techniques. Established screening, fetal ultrasound and invasive procedures with microarray testing allow the detection of a broad range of additional abnormalities not yet detectable by NIPT. NIPT approaches that take advantage of SNP information potentially allow the identification of parent of origin for imbalances, triploidy, uniparental disomy and consanguinity, and separate evaluation of dizygotic twins. Fetal fraction enrichment, improved sequencing and selected analysis of the most informative sequences should result in tests for additional chromosomal abnormalities. Providing adequate prenatal counseling poses a substantial challenge given the broad range of prenatal testing options now available.