Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: Should a fetal exome be used in the assessment of a dysmorphic or malformed fetus?

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 15-19

  Chitty, Lyn S ^a   Friedman, Jan M ^b   Langlois, Sylvie ^b  

^a RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT; CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; EXOME; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; HUMAN; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PROCEDURES;

CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DISSENT AND DISPUTES; EXOME; FEMALE; GENETIC TESTING; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS;

EID: 84956656754     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4718     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. ACMG Board of Directors. Points to consider in the clinical application of genomic sequencing. Genet Med 2012;14(8):759-61.
2. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Reid JG, et al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. N Engl J Med 2013; 369(16):1502-11.
3. Farwell KD, Shahmirzadi L, El-Khechen D, et al. Enhanced utility of family-centered diagnostic exome sequencing with inheritance model-based analysis: results from 500 unselected families with undiagnosed genetic conditions. Genet Med 2015;17(7):578-86.
4. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367(23):2175-84.
5. Skirton H, Goldsmith L, Jackson L, et al. Offering prenatal diagnostic tests: European guidelines for clinical practice. Eur J Hum Genet 2014;22(5):580-6.
6. Shaffer LG, Rosenfeld JA, Dabell MP, et al. Detection rates of clinically significant genomic alterations by microarrayanalysis for specific anomalies detected by ultrasound. Prenat Diagn 2012;32(10):986-95.
7. Callaway JL, Shaffer LG, Chitty LS, et al. The clinical utility of microarray technologies applied to prenatal cytogenetics in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype: a review of the literature. Prenat Diagn 2013;33(12):1119-23.
8. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Xia F, et al. Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. JAMA 2014;312(18):1870-9.
9. Gahl WA, Markello TC, Toro C, et al. The National Institutes of Health Undiagnosed Diseases Program: insights into rare diseases. Genet Med 2012;14(1):51-9.
10. Deciphering Developmental Disorders Study. Large-scale discovery of novel genetic causes of developmental disorders. Nature 2015;519(7542):223-8.
11. Filges I, Friedman JM. Exome sequencing for gene discovery in lethal fetal disorders-harnessing the value of extreme phenotypes. Prenat Diagn 2014. DOI:10.1002/pd.4464 [Epub ahead of print].
12. Carss KJ, Hillman SC, Parthiban V, et al.. Exome sequencing improves genetic diagnosis of structural fetal abnormalities revealed by ultrasound. Hum Mol Genet 2014;23(12):3269-77.
13. Drury S, Williams H, Trump N, et al. Exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with sonographic abnormalities. Prenat Diagn 2015; 35(10):1010-7.
14. Saunders CJ, Miller NA, Soden SE, et al. Rapid whole-genome sequencing for genetic disease diagnosis in neonatal intensive care units. Sci Transl Med 2012;4(154):154ra135.
15. Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, et al. American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med 2013;15(7):565-74.
16. Green RC, Berg JS, Berry GT, et al. Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing. Genet Med 2012;14(4):405-10.
17. Kalynchuk EJ, Althouse A, Parker LS, et al. Prenatal whole-exome sequencing: parental attitudes. Prenat Diagn 2015. DOI:10.1002/pd.4635[Epub ahead of print].
18. Westerfield LE, Stover SR, Mathur VS, et al. Reproductive genetic counseling challenges associated with diagnostic exome sequencing in a large academic private reproductive genetic counseling practice. Prenat Diagn 2015. DOI:10.1002/pd.4674[Epub ahead of print].
19. Alamillo CL, Powis Z, Farwell K, et al. Exome sequencing positively identified relevant alterations in more than half of cases with an indication of prenatal ultrasound anomalies. Prenat Diagn 2015. DOI:10.1002/pd.4648[Epub ahead of print].
20. Hillman SC, Willams D, Carss KJ, et al. Prenatal exome sequencing for fetuses with structural abnormalities: the next step. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45(1):4-9.
21. Frebourg T. The challenge for the next generation of medical geneticists. Hum Mutat 2014;35(8):909-11.
22. Lohmann K, Klein C. Next generation sequencing and the future of genetic diagnosis. Neurotherapeutics 2014;11(4):699-707.
23. Xue Y, Ankala A, Wilcox WR, Hegde MR. Solving the molecular diagnostic testing conundrum for Mendelian disorders in the era of next-generation sequencing: single-gene, gene panel, or exome/genome sequencing. Genet Med 2015;17(6):444-51.
24. Clarke AJ. Managing the ethical challenges of next-generation sequencing in genomic medicine. Br Med Bull 2014;111(1):17-30.
25. Lohn Z, Adam S, Birch PH, Friedman JM. Incidental findings from clinical genome-wide sequencing: a review. J Genet Couns 2014;23(4):463-73.
26. Westerfield L, Darilek S, van den Veyver IB. Counseling challenges with variants of uncertain significance and incidental findings in prenatal genetic screening and diagnosis. J Clin Med 2014;3(3):1018-32.
27. Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Engl J Med 2014;370(25):2418-25.
28. Ghouse J, Have CT, Weeke P, et al. Rare genetic variants previously associated with congenital forms of long QT syndrome have little or no effect on the QT interval. Eur Heart J 2015. DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv297[Epub ahead of print].
29. Shashi V, McConkie-Rosell A, Schoch K, et al. Practical considerations in the clinical application of whole-exome sequencing. Clin Genet 2015. DOI:10.1111/cge.12569[Epub ahead of print].