Origin and clinical relevance of chromosomal aberrations other than the common trisomies detected by genome-wide NIPS: Results of the TRIDENT study

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2018, Pages 480-485

  Van Opstal, Diane ^a   Van Maarle, Merel C ^b   Lichtenbelt, Klaske ^c   Weiss, Marjan M ^d   Schuring Blom, Heleen ^c   Bhola, Shama L ^d   Hoffer, Mariette J V ^e   Amsterdam, Karin Huijsdens Van ^b   Macville, Merryn V ^f   Kooper, Angelique J A ^g   Faas, Brigitte H W ^g   Govaerts, Lutgarde ^a   Tan Sindhunata, Gita M ^d   Den Hollander, Nicolette ^e   Feenstra, Ilse ^g   Galjaard, Robert Jan H ^a   Oepkes, Dick ^e   Ghesquiere, Stijn ^f   Brouwer, Rutger W W ^a   Beulen, Lean ^g   Bollen, Sander ^e   Elferink, Martin G ^c   Straver, Roy ^d   Henneman, Lidewij ^d   Page Christiaens, Godelieve C ^c   Sistermans, Erik A ^d   more..

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^g RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

confined placental mosaicism; genome wide NIPS; noninvasive testing; prenatal screening; trisomy 21

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOSOME; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; CLINICAL OUTCOME; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FETUS DISEASE; FETUS GROWTH; FOLLOW UP; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; GESTATIONAL AGE; HIGH RISK PREGNANCY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL DISEASE; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PLACENTA DISORDER; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRENATAL SCREENING; TRISOMY; TRISOMY 13; TRISOMY 18; TRISOMY 21; TRISOMY 41; CHROMOSOME DISORDER; COPY NUMBER VARIATION; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; GENOMICS; METABOLISM; PLACENTA; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PROCEDURES; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS; CHROMOSOME DISORDERS; DNA COPY NUMBER VARIATIONS; FEMALE; GENETIC TESTING; GENOMICS; HUMANS; PLACENTA; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; TRISOMY; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

EID: 85045925258     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.132     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Lo YM, Corbetta N, Chamberlain PF, et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet. 1997;350:485-487.
2. Taylor-Phillips S, Freeman K, Geppert J, et al. Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: A systematic review and meta-Analysis. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e010002.
3. Brady P, Brison N, Van Den Bogaert K, et al. Clinical implementation of NIPT-Technical and biological challenges. Clin Genet. 2016;89: 523-530.
4. Vermeesch JR, Voet T, Devriendt K. Prenatal and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Nat Rev Genet. 2016;17:643-656.
5. Pescia G, Guex N, Iseli C, et al. Cell-free DNA testing of an extended range of chromosomal anomalies: clinical experience with 6, 388 consecutive cases. Genet Med. 2017;19:169-175.
6. Fiorentino F, Bono S, Pizzuti F, et al. The clinical utility of genome-wide non invasive prenatal screening. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37:593-601.
7. Snyder MW, Simmons LE, Kitzman JO, et al. Copy-number variation and false positive prenatal aneuploidy screening results. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1639-1645.
8. Brison N, Van Den Bogaert K, Dehaspe L, et al. Accuracy and clinical value of maternal incidental findings during noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidies. Genet Med. 2017;19:306-313.
9. Bianchi DW, Chudova D, Sehnert AJ, et al. Noninvasive prenatal testing and incidental detection of occult maternal malignancies. JAMA. 2015;314:162-169.
10. Wang E, Batey A, Struble C, Musci T, Song K, Oliphant A. Gestational age and maternal weight effects on fetal cell-free DNA in maternal plasma. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33:662-666.
11. Flori E, Doray B, Gautier E, et al. Circulating cell-free fetal DNA in maternal serum appears to originate from cyto-And syncytiotrophoblastic cells. Case report. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:723-724.
12. Grati FR, Malvestiti F, Ferreira JC, et al. Fetoplacental mosaicism: potential implications for false-positive and false-negative noninvasive prenatal screening results. Genet Med. 2014;16:620-624.
13. Srebniak MI, Diderich KE, Noomen P, Dijkman A, de Vries FA, van Opstal D. Abnormal non-invasive prenatal test results concordant with karyotype of cytotrophoblast but not reflecting abnormal fetal karyotype. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44:109-111.
14. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI & Polak J, et al. False negative NIPT results: risk figures for chromosomes 13, 18 and 21 based on chorionic villi results in 5967 cases and literature review. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0146794.
15. Oepkes D, Page-Christiaens LC, Bax CJ, et al. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part I-clinical impact. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36:1083-1090.
16. van Schendel RV, Page-Christiaens L, Beulen L, et al. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II-womens perspectives. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36:1091-1098.
17. Straver R, Sistermans EA, Holstege H, Visser A, Oudejans CB, Reinders MJ. WISECONDOR: detection of fetal aberrations from shallow sequencing maternal plasma based on a within-sample comparison scheme. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:e31.
18. Smidt-Jensen S, Christensen B, Lind AM. Chorionic villus culture for prenatal diagnosis of chromosome defects: reduction of the long-Term cultivation time. Prenat Diagn. 1989;9:309-319.
19. Hastings R, Howell P, Bricarelli FD, Kristoffersson U, Cavani S. Specific Constitutional Cytogenetic Guidelines. Accessed on 2012. http://www.ec-A.eu/en/GUIDELINES.html.
20. Wolstenholme J. Confined placental mosaicism for trisomies 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 16, and 22: Their incidence, likely origins, and mechanisms for cell lineage compartmentalization. Prenat Diagn. 1996;16:511-524.
21. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI. Cytogenetic confirmation of a positive NIPT result: evidence-based choice between chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis depending on chromosome aberration. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2016;16:513-520.
22. Malvestiti F, Agrati C, Grimi B, et al. Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:1117-1127.
23. Hahnemann JM, Vejerslev LO. European collaborative research on mosaicism in CVS (EUCROMIC)-fetal and extrafetal cell lineages in 192 gestations with CVS mosaicism involving single autosomal trisomy. Am J Med Genet. 1997;70:179-187.
24. Schuring-Blom GH, Keijzer M, Jakobs ME, et al. Molecular cytogenetic analysis of term placentae suspected of mosaicism using fluorescence in situ hybridization. Prenat Diagn. 1993;13:671-679.
25. Visser GH, Eilers PH, Elferink-Stinkens PM, Merkus HM, Wit JM. New Dutch reference curves for birthweight by gestational age. Early Hum Dev. 2009;85:737-744.
26. Lebo RV, Novak RW, Wolfe K, Michelson M, Robinson H, Mancuso MS. Discordant circulating fetal DNA and subsequent cytogenetics reveal false negative, placental mosaic, and fetal mosaic cfDNA genotypes. J Transl Med. 2015;13:260.
27. Lestou VS, Kalousek DK. Confined placental mosaicism and intrauterine fetal growth. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1998;79:F223-226.
28. Toutain J, Labeau-Gauzere C, Barnetche T, Horovitz J, Saura R. Confined placental mosaicism and pregnancy outcome: A distinction needs to be made between types 2 and 3. Prenat Diagn. 2010;30:1155-1164.
29. Kalousek DK, Howard-Peebles PN, Olson SB, et al. Confirmation of CVS mosaicism in term placentae and high frequency of intrauterine growth retardation association with confined placental mosaicism. Prenat Diagn. 1991;11:743-750.
30. Benn P. Trisomy 16 and trisomy 16 mosaicism: A review. Am J Med Genet. 1998;79:121-133.
31. Eggermann T, Soellner L, Buiting K, Kotzot D. Mosaicism and uniparental disomy in prenatal diagnosis. Trends Mol Med. 2015;21:77-87.
32. van Schendel RV, Dondorp WJ, Timmermans DR, et al. NIPT-based screening for Down syndrome and beyond: what do pregnant women think? Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:598-604.
33. Tamminga S, van Schendel RV, Rommers W, et al. Changing to NIPT as a first-Tier screening test and future perspectives: opinions of health professionals. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:1316-1323.
34. Gregg AR, Skotko BG, Benkendorf JL, et al. Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, 2016 update: A position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2016;18:1056-1065.
35. Van Opstal D, de Vries F, Govaerts L, et al. Benefits and burdens of using a SNP array in pregnancies at increased risk for the common aneuploidies. Hum Mutat. 2015;36:319-326.
36. Snyder HL, Curnow KJ, Bhatt S, Bianchi DW. Follow-up of multiple aneuploidies and single monosomies detected by noninvasive prenatal testing: implications for management and counseling. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36:203-209.
37. Sistermans E, Straver R, Faas BH. Maternal malignancies detected with noninvasive prenatal testing. JAMA. 2015;314:2192.
38. van den Boom D, Ehrich M, Kim SK. Copy-number variation and false positive results of prenatal screening. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2584.
39. Wolstenholme J, Emslie JB, Connors S. Association of Clinical Cytogeneticists chorion villus sampling database 1987-2000. Prenat Diagn. 2006;26:420-427.
40. Battaglia P, Baroncini A, Mattarozzi A, et al. Cytogenetic follow-up of chromosomal mosaicism detected in first-Trimester prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 2014;34:739-747.