Chromosomal Microarrays for the Prenatal Detection of Microdeletions and Microduplications

Clinics in Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 261-276

  Wou, Karen ^a   Levy, Brynn ^a   Wapner, Ronald J ^a  

^a NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

Cell free DNA; Copy number variant; Genetic counseling; Microarray; Microdeletion; Microduplication

Indexed keywords

CAT CRY SYNDROME; CHONDRODYSPLASIA; CHROMOSOMAL MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; CHROMOSOME 15Q11 Q13 MICRODUPLICATION; CHROMOSOME 17P13 MICRODUPLICATION; CHROMOSOME 1P36 MICRODELETION; CHROMOSOME 3Q29 MICRODELETION; CHROMOSOME 5Q35 MICRODUPLICATION; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; CHROMOSOME DELETION; CHROMOSOME DELETION 22Q11; CHROMOSOME DUPLICATION; COMPARATIVE GENOMIC HYBRIDIZATION; COPY NUMBER VARIATION; DIGEORGE SYNDROME; GENETIC COUNSELING; HAPPY PUPPET SYNDROME; HUMAN; JACOBSEN SYNDROME; KARYOTYPE; KLEEFSTRA SYNDROME; KOOLEN DE VRIES SYNDROME; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MILLER DIEKER SYNDROME; POTOCKI LUPSKI SYNDROME; PRADER WILLI SYNDROME; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; SMITH MAGENIS SYNDROME; SOTOS SYNDROME; WILLIAMS BEUREN SYNDROME; WOLF HIRSCHHORN SYNDROME; DNA MICROARRAY; FEMALE; KARYOTYPING; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES;

CHROMOSOME DELETION; CHROMOSOME DUPLICATION; FEMALE; GENETIC COUNSELING; HUMANS; KARYOTYPING; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS;

EID: 84971467521     PISSN: 02722712     EISSN: 15579832     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cll.2016.01.017     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ACOG practice bulletin no. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol 2007, 110(6):1459-1467.
2. Tepperberg J., Pettenati M.J., Rao P.N., et al. Prenatal diagnosis using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): 2-year multi-center retrospective study and review of the literature. Prenat Diagn 2001, 21(4):293-301.
3. Evans M.I., Henry G.P., Miller W.A., et al. International, collaborative assessment of 146,000 prenatal karyotypes: expected limitations if only chromosome-specific probes and fluorescent in-situ hybridization are used. Hum Reprod 1999, 14(5):1213-1216.
4. Ward B.E., Gersen S.L., Carelli M.P., et al. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aneuploidies by fluorescence in situ hybridization: clinical experience with 4,500 specimens. Am J Hum Genet 1993, 52(5):854-865.
5. Hulten M.A.D.S., Pertl B. Rapid and simple prenatal diagnosis of common chromosome disorders: advantages and disadvantages of the molecular methods FISH and QF-PCR. Reproduction 2003, 126(3):279-297.
6. El Mouatassima S., Becker M., Kuziob S., et al. Prenatal diagnosis of common aneuploidies using multiplex quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction. Fetal Diagn Ther 2004, 19:496-503.
7. Mann K., Donaghue C., Fox S.P., et al. Strategies for the rapid prenatal diagnosis of chromosome aneuploidy. Eur J Hum Genet 2004, 12(11):907-915.
8. Divane A., Carter N.P., Spathas D.H., et al. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of aneuploidy from uncultured amniotic fluid cells using five-colour fluorescence in situ hybridization. Prenat Diagn 1994, 14(11):1061-1069.
9. Shearer B.M., Thorland E.C., Gonzales P.R., et al. Evaluation of a commercially available focused aCGH platform for the detection of constitutional chromosome anomalies. Am J Med Genet 2007, 143A:2357-2370.
10. Beaudet A.L., Belmont J.W. Array-based DNA diagnostics: let the revolution begin. Annu Rev Med 2008, 59:113-129.
11. Bignell G.R., Huang J., Greshock J., et al. High-resolution analysis of DNA copy number using oligonucleotide microarrays. Genome Res 2004, 14(2):287-295.
12. Manning M., Hudgins L., Professional Practice and Guidelines Committee Array-based technology and recommendations for utilization in medical genetics practice for detection of chromosomal abnormalities. Genet Med 2010, 12(11):742-745.
13. Shaffer L.G., Coppinger J., Alliman S., et al. Comparison of microarray-based detection rates for cytogenetic abnormalities in prenatal and neonatal specimens. Prenat Diagn 2008, 28(9):789-795.
14. Kleeman L., Bianchi D.W., Shaffer L.G., et al. Use of array comparative genomic hybridization for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with sonographic anomalies and normal metaphase karyotype. Prenat Diagn 2009, 29(13):1213-1217.
15. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics Committee opinion no. 581: the use of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol 2013, 122(6):1374-1377.
16. Aradhya S., Cherry A.M. Array-based comparative genomic hybridization: clinical contexts for targeted and whole-genome designs. Genet Med 2007, 9(9):553-559.
17. Snijders A.M., Nowak N., Segraves R., et al. Assembly of microarrays for genome-wide measurement of DNA copy number. Nat Genet 2001, 29(3):263-264.
18. Zhao X., Li C., Paez J.G., et al. An integrated view of copy number and allelic alterations in the cancer genome using single nucleotide polymorphism arrays. Cancer Res 2004, 64(9):3060-3071.
19. Coppinger J., Alliman S., Lamb A.N., et al. Whole-genome microarray analysis in prenatal specimens identifies clinically significant chromosome alterations without increase in results of unclear significance compared to targeted microarray. Prenat Diagn 2009, 29:1156-1166.
20. Hoang S., Ahn J., Mann K., et al. Detection of mosaicism for genome imbalance in a cohort of 3,042 clinical cases using an oligonucleotide array CGH platform. Eur J Med Genet 2011, 54(2):121-129.
21. Ballif B.C., Rorem E.A., Sundin K., et al. Detection of low-level mosaicism by array CGH in routine diagnostic specimens. Am J Med Genet A 2006, 140(24):2757-2767.
22. Cheung S.W., Shaw C.A., Scott D.A., et al. Microarray-based CGH detects chromosomal mosaicism not revealed by conventional cytogenetics. Am J Med Genet A 2007, 143A(15):1679-1686.
23. Neill N.J., Torchia B.S., Bejjani B.A., et al. Comparative analysis of copy number detection by whole-genome BAC and oligonucleotide array CGH. Mol Cytogenet 2010, 3:11.
24. Scott S.A., Cohen N., Brandt T., et al. Detection of low-level mosaicism and placental mosaicism by oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization. Genet Med 2010, 12(2):85-92.
25. Hook E.B. Exclusion of chromosomal mosaicism: tables of 90%, 95% and 99% confidence limits and comments on use. Am J Hum Genet 1977, 29(1):94-97.
26. Hall G.K., Mackie F.L., Hamilton S., et al. Chromosomal microarray analysis allows prenatal detection of low level mosaic autosomal aneuploidy. Prenat Diagn 2014, 34(5):505-507.
27. Shaffer L.G., Dabell M.P., Rosenfeld J.A., et al. Referral patterns for microarray testing in prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 2012, 32(6):611.
28. Chang Y.W., Chang C.M., Sung P.L., et al. An overview of a 30-year experience with amniocentesis in a single tertiary medical center in Taiwan. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2012, 51(2):206-211.
29. Hillman S.C., McMullan D.J., Hall G., et al. Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013, 41(6):610-620.
30. Wapner R.J., Martin C.L., Levy B., et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med 2012, 367(23):2175-2184.
31. Shaffer L.G., Dabell M.P., Fisher A.J., et al. Experience with microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization for prenatal diagnosis in over 5000 pregnancies. Prenat Diagn 2012, 32(10):976-985.
32. Callaway J.L., Shaffer L.G., Chitty L.S., 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):1119-1123.
33. Faas B.H., van der Burgt I., Kooper A.J., et al. Identification of clinically significant, submicroscopic chromosome alterations and UPD in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies using genome-wide 250k SNP array analysis. J Med Genet 2010, 47:586-594.
34. Shaffer L.G., Rosenfeld J.A., Dabell M.P., et al. Detection rates of clinically significant genomic alterations by microarray analysis for specific anomalies detected by ultrasound. Prenat Diagn 2012, 32(10):986-995.
35. Donnelly J.C., Platt L.D., Rebarber A., et al. Association of copy number variants with specific ultrasonographically detected fetal anomalies. Obstet Gynecol 2014, 124(1):83-90.
36. Van den Veyver I.B., Patel A., Shaw C.A., et al. Clinical use of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) for prenatal diagnosis in 300 cases. Prenat Diagn 2009, 29(1):29-39.
37. Iafrate A.J., Feuk L., Rivera M.N., et al. Detection of large-scale variation in the human genome. Nat Genet 2004, 36(9):949-951.
38. Sebat J., Lakshmi B., Troge J., et al. Large-scale copy number polymorphism in the human genome. Science 2004, 305(5683):525-528.
39. Lee C., Iafrate A.J., Brothman A.R. Copy number variations and clinical cytogenetic diagnosis of constitutional disorders. Nat Genet 2007, 39(7 Suppl):S48-S54.
40. Gross S.J., Bajaj K., Garry D., et al. Rapid and novel prenatal molecular assay for detecting aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes. Prenat Diagn 2011, 31(3):259-266.
41. Vialard F., Simoni G., Gomes D.M., et al. Prenatal BACs-on-Beads™: the prospective experience of five prenatal diagnosis laboratories. Prenat Diagn 2012, 32(4):329-335.
42. Shaffer L.G., Coppinger J., Morton S.A., et al. The development of a rapid assay for prenatal testing of common aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes. Prenat Diagn 2011, 31(8):778-787.
43. Rosenfeld J.A., Morton S.A., Hummel C., et al. Experience using a rapid assay for aneuploidy and microdeletion/microduplication detection in over 2,900 prenatal specimens. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014, 36(3):231-241.
44. Grati F.R., Molina Gomes D., Ferreira J.C., et al. Prevalence of recurrent pathogenic microdeletions and microduplications in over 9500 pregnancies. Prenat Diagn 2015, 35(8):801-809.
45. Cancrini C., Puliafito P., Digilio M.C., et al. Clinical features and follow-up in patients with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. J Pediatr 2014, 164(6):1475-1480.e2.
46. Van Zuuren F.J., van Schie E.C., van Baaren N.K. Uncertainty in the information provided during genetic counseling. Patient Educ Couns 1997, 32:129-139.
47. Politi M.C., Legare F. Physicians' reactions to uncertainty in the context of shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns 2010, 80:155-157.
48. Bernhardt B.A., Rushton C.H., Carrese J., et al. Distress and burnout among genetic service providers. Genet Med 2009, 11:527-535.
49. Bernhardt B.A., Kellom K., Barbarese A., et al. An exploration of genetic counselors' needs and experiences with prenatal chromosomal microarray testing. J Genet Couns 2014, 23(6):938-947.
50. Bernhardt B.A., Soucier D., Hanson K., et al. Women's experiences receiving abnormal prenatal chromosomal microarray testing results. Genet Med 2013, 15(2):139-145.
51. Hunt L.M., de Voogd K.B., Castaneda H. The routine and the traumatic in prenatal genetic diagnosis: does clinical information inform patient decision-making?. Patient Educ Couns 2005, 56:302-312.
52. Benn P., Cuckle H. Theoretical performance of non-invasive prenatal testing for chromosome imbalances using counting of cell-free DNA fragments in maternal plasma. Prenat Diagn 2014, 34(8):778-783.
53. Wapner R.J., Babiarz J.E., Levy B., et al. Expanding the scope of noninvasive prenatal testing: detection of fetal micro deletion syndromes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015, 212(3):332.e1-332.e9.
54. Jensen T.J., Dzakula Z., Deciu C., et al. Detection of micro deletion 22 q11.2 in a fetus by next-generation sequencing of maternal plasma. Clin Chem 2012, 58(7):1148-1151.
55. Yatsenko S.A., Peters D.G., Saller D.N., et al. Maternal cell-free DNA-based screening for fetal micro deletion and the importance of careful diagnostic follow-up. Genet Med 2015, 17(10):836-838.
56. Rabinowitz M., Savage M., Pettersen B., et al. Noninvasive cell-free DNA-based prenatal detection of micro deletions sing single nucleotide polymorphism-targeted sequencing. Obstet Gynecol 2014, 123(Suppl 1):167S.
57. Peters D., Chu T., Yatsenko S.A., et al. Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of a fetal microdeletion syndrome. N Engl J Med 2011, 365(19):1847-1848.
58. Dondorp W., de Wert G., Bombard Y., et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy and beyond: challenges of responsible innovation in prenatal screening. Summary and recommendations. Eur J Hum Genet 2015, [Epub ahead of print].
59. Akolekar R., Beta J., Picciarelli G., et al. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015, 45(1):16-26.