Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in a diagnostic laboratory; experience with >1000 cases and review of the literature

The use of chromosomal microarray for prenatal diagnosis

Chromosomal microarray analysis is a high-resolution, whole-genome technique used to identify chromosomal abnormalities, including those detected by conventional cytogenetic techniques, as well as small submicroscopic deletions and duplications referred to as copy number variants. Because chromosomal microarray analysis has a greater resolution than conventional karyotyping, it can detect deletions and duplications down to a 50- to 100-kb level. The purpose of this document is to discuss the technique, advantages, and disadvantages of chromosomal microarray analysis and its indications and limitations. We recommend the following: (1) that chromosomal microarray analysis be offered when genetic analysis is performed in cases with fetal structural anomalies and/or stillbirth and replaces the need for fetal karyotype in these cases (GRADE 1A); (2) that providers discuss the benefits and limitations of chromosomal microarray analysis and conventional karyotype with patients who are considering amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS), and that both options should be available to women who choose to undergo diagnostic testing (GRADE 1B); (3) that pre- and posttest counseling should be performed by trained genetic counselors, geneticists, or other providers with expertise in the complexities of interpreting chromosomal microarray analysis results (Best Practice); (4) that patients be informed that chromosomal microarray analysis does not detect every genetic disease or syndrome and specifically does not detect autosomal-recessive disorders associated with single gene point mutations, as well as that chromosomal microarray analysis can detect consanguinity and nonpaternity in some cases (Best Practice); (5) that patients in whom a fetal variant of uncertain significance is detected by prenatal diagnosis receive counseling from experts who have access to databases that provide updated information concerning genotype-phenotype correlations (Best Practice).

Validation of a Chromosomal Microarray for Prenatal Diagnosis Using a Prospective Cohort of Pregnancies with Increased Risk for Chromosome Abnormalities

AIM

Validation of a chromosomal microarray for improved prenatal diagnosis for chromosomal abnormalities among high-risk pregnancies.

METHODS

A cohort of 213 pregnancies was investigated by chromosomal microarray and the results were compared with quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR), karyotype, and 850K single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray results. The detection limit of mosaicism was determined by assaying different trisomy mosaic constructs down to ∼12%. Imprecision estimates from replicates of mean log₂ ratio values for a 200 kb deletion and 400 kb duplication were determined by evaluating the coefficient of variation (CV%).

RESULTS

Excluding pregnancies with aneuploidy, the chromosomal microarray detected 19/213 (8.9%) pregnancies with copy number abnormalities. These were classified as pathogenic in 11/213 (5.2%) cases, as variants of uncertain significance in 4/213 (1.9%) cases, and as likely benign in 4/213 (1.9%) cases. In 15/213 (7.0%) pregnancies, these abnormalities were not detectable by karyotype. Importantly, 8/11 (72.7%) of the pathogenic abnormalities detected by chromosomal microarray were only detectable by this modality. There were no false-positive results and only eight false-negative results. The chromosomal microarray showed excellent sensitivity (96.2%) and specificity (100.0%). The lower detection limit for mosaicism was ∼12%. Imprecision for the 0.2 Mb deletion (11.6 CV%) and 0.4 Mb duplication (5.9 CV%) was very low.

CONCLUSION

This chromosomal microarray showed excellent diagnostic performance with improved detection rates compared to karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis of clinically relevant fetal chromosomal abnormalities.

Making the most of uncertainty: Treasuring exceptions in prenatal diagnosis

Throughout the 20th century, human genetics research was driven by the identification of new variants. As pioneering geneticist William Bateson put it, novel variants were "exceptions" to "treasure". With the rise of human chromosomal analysis in the postwar period, the identification of genetic variants became increasingly significant to clinical and prenatal diagnosis. Human geneticists had long sought a broader sampling of human genetic variation, from a largely "normal" population. The expansion of prenatal diagnosis in the late 20th century offered a new resource for identifying novel genetic variants. In the prenatal diagnostic setting however, many of the exceptions to be treasured were of uncertain clinical significance, which raised anxiety among parents. In the early 1990s, providers reported that specific uncertain results from chorionic villus sampling (CVS) facilitated prenatal diagnoses that were not previously possible. Based on this, some prenatal diagnostic providers began to embrace uncertainty, when properly managed to reduce anxiety, rather than prevent it. The potential to produce uncertainty in prenatal diagnosis grew with whole genome microarray in the 2000s. Rather than outcomes to avoid, or accept as inevitable, providers presented uncertain results as starting points for research to improve the scope prenatal diagnosis, and bring future certainty.

Prenatal Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization in Fetuses With Structural Cardiac Anomalies

OBJECTIVES

To examine the diagnostic performance of array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) for fetal cardiac anomalies in two medium-sized Canadian prenatal genetics clinics.

METHODS

We prospectively recruited 22 pregnant women with fetal structural cardiac anomalies, normal rapid aneuploidy detection, and FISH for 22q11.2 testing for array CGH analysis.

RESULTS

One case had an 8p deletion that was also visible on karyotype and included the GATA4 gene, which has been associated with congenital heart disease. Two cases had inherited pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs) of variable expressivity and penetrance: one was a duplication of 16p11.2 and the other a deletion of 15q11.2. One case had the incidental finding of being a carrier of a recessive disease unrelated to the cardiac anomaly.

CONCLUSIONS

Of these prospectively recruited cases of fetal cardiac anomalies, 14% had a pathogenic result on array CGH. Pathogenic CNVs of variable penetrance and expressivity were a significant proportion of the positive results identified. These CNVs are generally associated with neurodevelopmental issues and may or may not have been associated with the fetus' underlying congenital heart disease. Array CGH increases the diagnostic yield in this group of patients; however, certain CNVs remain a challenge for counselling in the prenatal setting.

Contribution of genomic copy-number variations in prenatal oral clefts: a multicenter cohort study

PURPOSE

We sought to investigate the utility of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis of oral clefts, as compared with traditional chromosome analysis, for improved prenatal genetic counseling and discovery of a potential correlation between genotype and oral cleft.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis encompassed 270 prenatal oral cleft cases with documented detailed ultrasound findings and CMA results from four referral centers. Detection rates for pathogenic copy-number variants (CNVs) were calculated and compared with cases for which chromosome analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

The overall detection rate was 14.8% (40/270) for pathogenic CNVs by CMA, 7.2% (9/125) for the nonsyndromic cases, and 21.4% (31/145) for the syndromic cases. Of the nonsyndromic cases with ultrasound soft markers, 20% (5/25) were identified with pathogenic CNVs. CMA showed an improved detection rate of 15.3% (29/190) compared with 10.5% (20/190) for chromosome analysis.

CONCLUSION

This study not only highlights the improved detection of chromosomal defects by CMA in prenatal oral clefts but also deepens our understanding of oral clefts. The results suggest that CMA is highly recommended in prenatal invasive genetic testing not only for syndromic oral cleft cases but also for nonsyndromic cases with soft markers. Candidate genes including CRKL, AKAP8, SYDE1, BRD4 are worthy of further investigation regarding their role in human palatogenesis.Genet Med 18 10, 1052-1055.

Application of DNA Microarray to Clinical Diagnostics

Microarray-based technology to conduct array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) has made a significant impact on the diagnosis of human genetic diseases. Such diagnoses, previously undetectable by traditional G-banding chromosome analysis, are now achieved by identifying genomic copy number variants (CNVs) using the microarray. Not only can hundreds of well-characterized genetic syndromes be detected in a single assay, but new genomic disorders and disease-causing genes can also be discovered through the utilization of aCGH technology. Although other platforms such as single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays can be used for detecting CNVs, in this chapter we focus on describing the methods for performing aCGH using Agilent oligonucleotide arrays for both prenatal (e.g., amniotic fluid and chorionic villus sample) and postnatal samples (e.g., blood).

Karyotype versus genomic hybridization for the prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities: a metaanalysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) compared with karyotyping for the detection of numerical and structural chromosomal alterations in prenatal diagnosis.

STUDY DESIGN

A metaanalysis was performed using searches of PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Cochrane Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, Google Scholar, gray literature, and reference manuals. No language restriction was imposed. We included cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies published from January 1980 through March 2014 in the analysis. Studies of pregnant women who received chorionic villus biopsies, amniocentesis, or cordocentesis and then underwent CGH and karyotype analysis were included. Two independent reviewers assessed each study by title, abstract, and full text before its inclusion in the analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS2, and a third reviewer resolved any disagreement. Conclusions were obtained through tests (sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios) for the presence of numerical and structural chromosomal abnormalities. The reference used for these calculations was the presence of any abnormalities in either of the 2 tests (karyotype or CGH), although it should be noted that in most cases, the karyotyping test had a lower yield compared with CGH. Statistical analysis was performed in RevMan 5.2 and the OpenMeta[Analyst] program.

RESULTS

In all, 137 articles were found, and 6 were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. Five were included in the metaanalysis. According to the QUADAS2 analysis of methodology quality, there is an unclear risk for selection bias and reference and standard tests. In the other elements (flow, time, and applicability conditions), a low risk of bias was found. CGH findings were as follows: sensitivity 0.939 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.838-0.979), I(2) = 82%; specificity 0.999 (95% CI, 0.998-1.000), I(2) = 0%; negative likelihood ratio 0.050 (95% CI, 0.015-0.173), I(2) = 0%; and positive likelihood ratio 1346.123 (95% CI, 389-4649), I(2) = 0%. Karyotype findings were as follows: sensitivity 0.626 (95% CI, 0.408-0.802), I(2) = 93%; specificity 0.999 (95% CI, 0.998-1.000), I(2) = 0%; negative likelihood ratio 0.351 (95% CI, 0.101-1.220), I(2) = 0%; and positive likelihood ratio 841 (95% CI, 226-3128), I(2) = 10%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides evidence of the relative advantage of using CGH in the prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal and structural abnormalities over karyotyping, demonstrating significantly higher sensitivity with similar specificity.

Pathology of the stillborn infant for the general pathologist: part 2

As the information obtained from previable fetal and stillbirth autopsies is used not only to explain the loss to the parents, but for future pregnancy planning, general pathologists need to be comfortable in dealing with these autopsies. The importance of an adequate fetal examination has been emphasized in a recent policy on the subject by the American Board of Pathology http://www.abpath.org/FetalAutopsyPoli'cy.pdf. This second review paper covers the approach to hydrops fetalis. The approach to the nonanomalous and anomalous fetus was covered in the first part of this series.

Pränataler Array

Wegen des Fehlens stringenter Indikationskriterien hat sich die Microarray-CGH in der Pränataldiagnostik nur schwer etablieren können. Auf der Basis der Ergebnisse von 4626 pränatalen Chromosomenanalysen wurden Kriterien für die Indikationsstellung zur Durchführung der Microarray-CGH in der Pränataldiagnostik festgelegt und 6 Indikationsstellungen definiert. Nach den festgelegten Indikationsstellungen wurden von insgesamt 14.766 pränatal durchgeführten zytogenetischen Untersuchungen 337 (2,3 %) mittels Microarray-CGH untersucht. Bei 279 Feten mit strukturellen Auffälligkeiten im Ultraschall betrug der Anteil gesichert pathogener CNV 7,9 % und bei 58 Feten mit auffälligen, nach konventioneller Diagnostik/FISH nicht eindeutigen zytogenetischen Befunden 56,9 %. Der mithilfe der Microarray-CGH gefundene Anteil von 16,3 % mit klinisch relevanten Imbalancen, welche mittels konventioneller Zytogenetik nicht oder nicht hinreichend diagnostiziert werden konnte, spricht für die Wirksamkeit der festgelegten Indikationsstellungen.

Perspective on the technical challenges involved in the implementation of array-CGH in prenatal diagnostic testing

Our aim was to construct a streamlined technical workflow to facilitate a prospective, multi-centre evaluation of array comparative genomic hybridisation (array-CGH) in the prenatal diagnostic context. A collection of commercially available DNA extraction and quantification techniques were evaluated and compared using minimal quantities of amniotic fluid, chorionic villi and cultured cells. When prenatal DNA of suitable quality and quantity was obtained, array-CGH was performed using Oxford Gene Technology's (OGT, Oxford, UK) CytoSure™ ISCA 8 × 60 K oligo array platform. With starting quantities of 2-4 ml amniotic fluid, 2-5 mg chorionic villi or under 150,000 cultured cells the following optimised technical workflow was identified: DNA extraction using the iGENatal™ kit (igenbiotech, Madrid, Spain) and quantification by the Qubit® 2.0 Fluorometer with the Qubit® dsDNA BR assay kit (Invitrogen™, Eugene, OR, USA). In addition, it was elucidated that array-CGH can be successfully performed with as little as 125 ng DNA in the experiment using the OGT CytoSure™ ISCA 8 × 60 K oligo array platform. Amidst an on-going debate on whether array-CGH should be applied in the prenatal diagnostic setting, by following the technical recommendations described here genetics laboratories can now gain exposure to prenatal array-CGH testing without compromising the conventional karyotype result.

High-resolution microarray in the assessment of fetal anomalies detected by ultrasound

AIMS

The main aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of using high-resolution microarray to assist with prenatal diagnosis of ultrasound-detected fetal abnormality and to describe the frequency of abnormal results in different categories of fetal anomalies.

METHODS

Prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on women diagnosed with a fetal anomaly (ies) between February 2009 and December 2011 who were offered testing by microarray analysis (Affymetrix 2.7M SNP) and fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) instead of standard karyotyping. Fetal anomalies were categorised according to organ system involvement.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighteen women consented to testing with microarray. Eleven of one hundred eighteen (9.3%) cases had aneuploidy detected by FISH. Of the remaining 107, 23 (21.5%) had an abnormality detected on microarray, only three of which would have been detected using the combination of six-probe FISH and banded karyotype. The maximum expected yield for six-probe FISH and karyotype was thus 14/118 (11.8%), compared to 34/118 (28.8%), P < 0.0001. Of the 23 abnormalities detected with microarray, 10 (43%) were pathogenic, six (26%) were long continuous stretches of homozygosity and seven (30%) were of uncertain significance. The maximum yield was in cases with cardiovascular (100%); multiple (40%); central nervous system (CNS) (25%) and skeletal (9%) abnormalities.

CONCLUSION

This study has confirmed the feasibility of translation of microarray into clinical practice. 11.8% (14/118) of the cases would have a genetic basis of an abnormality with a FISH and banded karyotype. This figure is approximately tripled to 28.8% (34/118) if we offer FISH and microarray. High yield for imbalances are multiple, cardiovascular, CNS and skeletal abnormalities.

Counseling Challenges with Variants of Uncertain Significance and Incidental Findings in Prenatal Genetic Screening and Diagnosis

Prenatal genetic screening and testing provides prospective parents information about the health of their fetus. It is offered to find or address an increased risk for chromosomal abnormalities or other genetic conditions in the fetus or to identify the cause of fetal structural abnormalities detected by prenatal imaging. Genome-wide tests, such as the already widely-used chromosomal microarray analysis and emerging diagnostic whole exome and whole genome sequencing, have improved the ability to detect clinically significant findings, but have also increased the chance of detecting incidental findings and variants of uncertain significance. There is an extensive ongoing discussion about optimal strategies for diagnostic laboratories to report such findings and for providers to communicate them with patients. While consensus opinions and guidelines are beginning to appear, they often exclude the prenatal setting, due to its unique set of challenging considerations. These include more limited knowledge of the impact of genetic variants when prospectively detected in an ongoing pregnancy, the absence or limitations of detecting clinically recognizable phenotypes at the time of testing and the different decision-making processes that will ensue from testing. In this review, we examine these challenges within the medical ethical framework unique to prenatal care.

The Psychological Challenges of Replacing Conventional Karyotyping with Genomic SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Testing

Pregnant couples tend to prefer a maximum of information about the health of their fetus. Therefore, we implemented whole genome microarray instead of conventional karyotyping (CK) for all indications for prenatal diagnosis (PND). The array detects more clinically relevant anomalies, including early onset disorders, not related to the indication and more genetic anomalies of yet unquantifiable risk, so-called susceptibility loci (SL) for mainly neurodevelopmental disorders. This manuscript highlights the psychological challenges in prenatal genetic counselling when using the array and provides counselling suggestions. First, we suggest that pre-test decision counselling should emphasize deliberation about what pregnant couples wish to learn about the future health of their fetus more than information about possible outcomes. Second, pregnant couples need support in dealing with SL. Therefore, in order to consider the SL in a proportionate perspective, the presence of phenotypes associated with SL in the family, the incidence of a particular SL in control populations and in postnatally ascertained patients needs highlighting during post-test genetic counselling. Finally, the decision that couples need to make about the course of their pregnancy is more complicated when the expected phenotype is variable and not quantifiable. Therefore, during post-test psychological counseling, couples should concretize the options of continuing and ending their pregnancy; all underlying feelings and thoughts should be made explicit, as well as the couple’s resources, in order to attain adequate decision-making. As such, pre- and post-test counselling aids pregnant couples in handling the uncertainties that may accompany offering a broader scope of genetic PND using the array.

Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism in over 1600 cases using array comparative genomic hybridization as a first line test

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the detection of chromosomal mosaicism in chorionic villus (CVS) and amniotic fluid (AF) samples using array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction.

METHODS

All patients undergoing invasive prenatal testing by aCGH at a specialist prenatal screening service were included in the study. A total of 1609 samples (953 CVS and 656 AF) underwent quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction and targeted aCGH without concurrent conventional G-banded karyotyping.

RESULTS

Chromosomal mosaicism was detected in 20 of the 1609 cases (1.24%); of which 17 were derived from 953 CVS (1.78%), and three from 656 AF (0.46%). Mosaicism was observed at a level as low as 9%. Four cases were likely confined placental mosaicism, 12 were likely true fetal mosaicism, and four cases were unable to be classified into either group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the use of aCGH as a first line test is able to identify chromosomal mosaicism down to 9%, which is lower than the level reliably detected using standard cytogenetic analysis. aCGH avoids the disadvantages of culturing, which include culture bias, artifact, and culture failure.

Chromosomal Microarrays in Prenatal Diagnosis: Time for a Change of Policy?

Microarrays have replaced conventional karyotyping as a first-tier test for unbalanced chromosome anomalies in postnatal cytogenetics mainly due to their unprecedented resolution facilitating the detection of submicroscopic copy number changes at a rate of 10-20% depending on indication for testing. A number of studies have addressed the performance of microarrays for chromosome analyses in high risk pregnancies due to abnormal ultrasound findings and reported an excess detection rate between 5% and 10%. In low risk pregnancies, clear pathogenic copy number changes at the submicroscopic level were encountered in 1% or less. Variants of unclear clinical significance, unsolicited findings, and copy number changes with variable phenotypic consequences are the main issues of concern in the prenatal setting posing difficult management questions. The benefit of microarray testing may be limited in pregnancies with only moderately increased risks (advanced maternal age, positive first trimester test). It is suggested to not change the current policy of microarray application in prenatal diagnosis until more data on the clinical significance of copy number changes are available.

Genomic microarrays in prenatal diagnosis

The application of microarray-based techniques for the diagnosis of genomic rearrangements has been steadily growing in popularity since its introduction in 2004. Given the many advantages of these techniques over conventional cytogenetics, there is increasing pressure towards their application in prenatal diagnosis. However, there remain several important issues that must be addressed. For example, microarray-based techniques (comparative genomic hybridization-based arrays and single nucleotide polymorphism-based arrays) allow detection of even very small genomic imbalances that can determine pathological clinical conditions. In addition, there are other copy number variations which represent normal variation, with no detectable effects on phenotype. Given the still incomplete knowledge of the changes in our genome and the associated phenotypes, microarray-based diagnosis is likely to find variants of uncertain and unknown clinical significance. The interpretation of these variants is now a major challenge for the medical geneticist, who often find it difficult to establish precise correlations between genotype and phenotype. There is sufficient available evidence to justify the use of microarray-based diagnostics for a select number of specific conditions, but there is also an inevitable trend towards ever wider application. It is very important that this drift does not progress in an unchecked and uncontrolled manner under the thrust of commercial interests. Therefore, we recommend that scientific societies be vigilant and take an advisory role in the adopting of these technologies as new scientific knowledge becomes available.

Microarray-based prenatal diagnosis for the identification of fetal chromosome abnormalities

The goal of prenatal cytogenetic testing is to provide reassurance to the couple seeking testing for their pregnancy, identify chromosome abnormalities in the fetus, if present, and provide treatments and medical management for affected babies. Cytogenetic analysis of banded chromosomes has been the standard for identifying chromosome abnormalities in the fetus for over 40 years. With chromosome analysis, whole chromosome aneuploidies and large structural rearrangements can be identified. The sequencing of the human genome has provided the resources to develop molecular tools that allow higher resolution observations of human chromosomes. The future holds the promise of sequencing that may identify chromosomal imbalances and deleterious single nucleotide variants. This review will focus on the use of genomic microarrays for the testing and identification of chromosome anomalies in prenatal diagnosis and will discuss the future directions of fetal testing.

A prospective study of the clinical utility of prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in fetuses with ultrasound abnormalities and an exploration of a framework for reporting unclassified variants and risk factors

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical utility of chromosomal microarrays for prenatal diagnosis by a prospective study of fetuses with abnormalities detected on ultrasound.

METHODS

Patients referred for prenatal diagnosis due to ultrasound anomalies underwent analysis by array comparative genomic hybridization as the first-tier diagnostic test.

RESULTS

A total of 383 prenatal samples underwent analysis by array comparative genomic hybridization. Array analysis revealed causal imbalances in a total of 9.6% of patients (n = 37). Submicroscopic copy-number variations were detected in 2.6% of patients (n = 10/37), and arrays added valuable information over conventional karyotyping in 3.9% of patients (n = 15/37). We highlight a novel advantage of arrays; a 500-kb paternal insertional translocation is the likely driver of a de novo unbalanced translocation, thus improving recurrence risk calculation in this family. Variants of uncertain significance were revealed in 1.6% of patients (n = 6/383).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate the added value of chromosomal microarrays for prenatal diagnosis in the presence of ultrasound anomalies. We advocate reporting back only copy-number variations with known pathogenic significance. Although this approach might be considered opposite to the ideal of full reproductive autonomy of the parents, we argue why providing all information to parents may result in a false sense of autonomy.

The clinical utility of microarray technologies applied to prenatal cytogenetics in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype: a review of the literature

ABSTRACT

The clinical utility of microarray technologies when used in the context of prenatal diagnosis lies in the technology's ability to detect submicroscopic copy number changes that are associated with clinically significant outcomes. We have carried out a systematic review of the literature to calculate the utility of prenatal microarrays in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype. Amongst 12 362 cases in studies that recruited cases from all prenatal ascertainment groups, 295/12 362 (2.4%) overall were reported to have copy number changes with associated clinical significance (pCNC), 201/3090 (6.5%) when ascertained with an abnormal ultrasound, 50/5108 (1.0%) when ascertained because of increased maternal age and 44/4164 (1.1%) for all other ascertainment groups (e.g. parental anxiety and abnormal serum screening result). When additional prenatal microarray studies are included in which ascertainment was restricted to fetuses with abnormal ultrasound scans, 262/3730 (7.0%) were reported to have pCNCs. © 2013 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Chromosomal microarray analysis as a first-line test in pregnancies with a priori low risk for the detection of submicroscopic chromosomal abnormalities

In this study, we aimed to explore the utility of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in groups of pregnancies with a priori low risk for detection of submicroscopic chromosome abnormalities, usually not considered an indication for testing, in order to assess whether CMA improves the detection rate of prenatal chromosomal aberrations. A total of 3000 prenatal samples were processed in parallel using both whole-genome CMA and conventional karyotyping. The indications for prenatal testing included: advanced maternal age, maternal serum screening test abnormality, abnormal ultrasound findings, known abnormal fetal karyotype, parental anxiety, family history of a genetic condition and cell culture failure. The use of CMA resulted in an increased detection rate regardless of the indication for analysis. This was evident in high risk groups (abnormal ultrasound findings and abnormal fetal karyotype), in which the percentage of detection was 5.8% (7/120), and also in low risk groups, such as advanced maternal age (6/1118, 0.5%), and parental anxiety (11/1674, 0.7%). A total of 24 (0.8%) fetal conditions would have remained undiagnosed if only a standard karyotype had been performed. Importantly, 17 (0.6%) of such findings would have otherwise been overlooked if CMA was offered only to high risk pregnancies.The results of this study suggest that more widespread CMA testing of fetuses would result in a higher detection of clinically relevant chromosome abnormalities, even in low risk pregnancies. Our findings provide substantial evidence for the introduction of CMA as a first-line diagnostic test for all pregnant women undergoing invasive prenatal testing, regardless of risk factors.

Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is utilized in prenatal diagnosis to detect chromosomal abnormalities not visible by conventional karyotyping. A prospective cohort of women undergoing fetal CMA and karyotyping following abnormal prenatal ultrasound findings is presented in the context of a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature describing detection rates by CMA and karyotyping.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study of 243 women undergoing CMA alongside karyotyping when a structural abnormality was detected on prenatal ultrasound. A systematic review of the literature was also performed. MEDLINE (1970-Dec 2012), EMBASE (1980-Dec 2012) and CINAHL (1982-June 2012) databases were searched electronically. Selected studies included > 10 cases and prenatal CMA in addition to karyotyping. The search yielded 560 citations. Full papers were retrieved for 86, and 25 primary studies were included in the systematic review.

RESULTS

Our cohort study found an excess detection rate of abnormalities by CMA of 4.1% over conventional karyotyping when the clinical indication for testing was an abnormal fetal ultrasound finding; this was lower than the detection rate of 10% (95% CI, 8-13%) by meta-analysis. The rate of detection for variants of unknown significance (VOUS) was 2.1% (95% CI, 1.3-3.3%) when the indication for CMA was an abnormal scan finding. The VOUS detection rate was lower (1.4%; 95% CI, 0.5-3.7%) when any indication for prenatal CMA was meta-analyzed.

CONCLUSION

We present evidence for a higher detection rate by CMA than by karyotyping not just in the case of abnormal ultrasound findings but also in cases of other indications for invasive testing. It is likely that CMA will replace karyotyping in high-risk pregnancies.

Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings: evaluation of chromosomal microarray-based analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the frequency of karyotype abnormalities and chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome among fetuses with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings, and to evaluate the clinical value of chromosomal microarray-based analysis (CMA) in the study of such pregnancies.

METHODS

First, we carried out retrospective analysis of karyotype abnormalities and 22q11.2 deletion syndrome cases diagnosed between January 2009 and December 2011 in our center among fetuses with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings (n = 276). Second, CMA was performed in 51 of the fetuses with such findings, normal karyotype and negative or no 22q11.2 deletion syndrome study, and in the only fetus with a heart defect and an apparently balanced de novo chromosomal rearrangement.

RESULTS

Out of the 276 pregnancies with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings, karyotyping revealed a chromosomal abnormality in 44 (15.9%). Of fetuses with normal karyotype in which 22q11.2 deletion syndrome studies were performed, 6.4% (5/78) had this microdeletion syndrome. Among fetuses with abnormal cardiac findings, normal karyotype and negative or no 22q11.2 deletion syndrome study that underwent CMA, the detection rate of pathogenic copy number variants not detected by conventional cytogenetics was 2.0% (1/51), and no variants of uncertain clinical significance were found. In the fetus with a heart defect and an apparently balanced de novo chromosomal rearrangement, CMA revealed that the rearrangement was not truly balanced.

CONCLUSIONS

In the assessment of genetic abnormalities in pregnancies with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings, the diagnostic yield may be increased by 2% if CMA is used as a complementary tool to conventional cytogenetics. Our results suggest that CMA could be a good alternative to karyotyping in these pregnancies.

Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis: a survey of prenatal genetic counselors' experiences and attitudes

OBJECTIVE

Studies showing the efficacy and accuracy of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in prenatal diagnosis may position it as a first-tier prenatal test. This study seeks to characterize the practices and attitudes of North American prenatal genetic counselors regarding CMA.

METHOD

Genetic counselors (N = 196) in Canada and the USA responded to an anonymous online survey. Completed surveys were analyzed (n = 160).

RESULTS

Most respondents viewed CMA as useful (73%), presented CMA to patients (84%), and had ordered CMA at least once (69%). The use of full versus targeted arrays varied. Logistic regression analyses identified three significant predictors for the view that prenatal CMA is useful: more prenatal counseling experience, younger age, and previously presenting CMA to a patient. Three factors predicted the likelihood of offering CMA to prenatal patients: percentage of time spent in prenatal practice, belief that CMA is useful, and practicing in the USA (versus Canada). Reasons cited for not using CMA included financial concerns, the possibility of ambiguous results, and ethical concerns. Most respondents (n = 111) believed that ambiguous results are an ethical issue.

CONCLUSION

Clinical guidelines for prenatal CMA, further research on specific copy number variants, and broader availability of targeted arrays to reduce ambiguous results are needed.

Prenatal diagnosis using array-CGH: a French experience

Array-CGH or Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) is increasingly used in prenatal diagnosis throughout the world. However, routine practices are very different among centers and countries, regarding CMA indications, design and resolution of microarrays, notification and interpretation of Copy Number Alterations (CNA). We present our data and experience from our Fetal Medicine Center on 224 prospective prenatal diagnoses. Our approach is practical, and aims to propose a strategy to offer Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) to selected fetuses and to help to interpret CNA. We hope that this publication could encourage development of CMA in centers that have not started yet this activity in prenatal routine, and could contribute to edict guidelines in this field.

Meeting the challenge of interpreting high-resolution single nucleotide polymorphism array data in prenatal diagnosis: does increased diagnostic power outweigh the dilemma of rare variants?

OBJECTIVE

Several studies have already shown the superiority of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) compared with conventional karyotyping for prenatal investigation of fetal ultrasound abnormality. This study used very high-resolution single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays to determine the impact on detection rates of all clinical categories of copy number variations (CNVs), and address the issue of interpreting and communicating findings of uncertain or unknown clinical significance, which are to be expected at higher frequency when using very high-resolution CMA.

DESIGN

Prospective validation study.

SETTING

Tertiary clinical genetics centre.

POPULATION

Women referred for further investigation of fetal ultrasound anomaly.

METHODS

We prospectively tested 104 prenatal samples using both conventional karyotyping and high-resolution arrays.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The detection rates for each clinical category of CNV.

RESULTS

Unequivocal pathogenic CNVs were found in six cases, including one with uniparental disomy (paternal UPD 14). A further four cases had a 'likely pathogenic' finding. Overall, CMA improved the detection of 'pathogenic' and 'likely pathogenic' abnormalities from 2.9% (3/104) to 9.6% (10/104). CNVs of 'unknown' clinical significance that presented interpretational difficulties beyond results from parental investigations were detected in 6.7% (7/104) of samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased detection sensitivity appears to be the main benefit of high-resolution CMA. Despite this, in this cohort there was no significant benefit in terms of improving detection of small pathogenic CNVs. A potential disadvantage is the high detection rate of CNVs of 'unknown' clinical significance. These findings emphasise the importance of establishing an evidence-based policy for the interpretation and reporting of CNVs, and the need to provide appropriate pre- and post-test counselling.

Prenatal Diagnosis of Chromosome Abnormalities: A 13-Year Institution Experience

Objective: To analyze trends in screening and invasive prenatal diagnosis of chromosome abnormalities (CA) over a 13-year period and correlate them to changes in the national prenatal screening policy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed Down syndrome (DS) screening tests and fetal karyotypes obtained by prenatal invasive testing (IT) in our fetal medicine unit between January 1999 and December 2011. Results: A total of 24,226 prenatal screening tests for DS and 11,045 invasive procedures have been analyzed. Over a 13-year period, utilization of non-invasive screening methods has significantly increased from 57% to 89%. The percentage of invasive procedures has declined from 49% to 12%, although the percentage of IT performed for maternal anxiety has increased from 22% to 55%. The percentage of detected CA increased from 2.5% to 5.9%. Overall, 31 invasive procedures are needed to diagnose 1 abnormal case, being 23 procedures in medical indications and 241 procedures in non-medical indications. Conclusions: Our experience on screening and invasive prenatal diagnostic practice shows a decrease of the number of IT, with a parallel decline in medical indications. There is an increasing efficiency of prenatal screening program to detect CA. Despite the increasing screening policies, our population shows a growing request for prenatal IT. The a priori low risk population shows a not negligible residual risk for relevant CA. This observation challenges the current prenatal screening strategy focused on DS; showing that the residual risk is higher than the current cut-off used to indicate an invasive technique.

Detection rates of clinically significant genomic alterations by microarray analysis for specific anomalies detected by ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to understand the diagnostic utility of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH)-based microarrays for pregnancies with abnormal ultrasound findings.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 2858 pregnancies with abnormal ultrasounds and normal karyotypes (when performed) tested in our laboratory using CGH microarrays targeted to known chromosomal syndromes with later versions providing backbone coverage of the entire genome. Abnormalities were stratified according to organ system involvement. Detection rates for clinically significant findings among these categories were calculated.

RESULTS

Clinically significant genomic alterations were identified in cases with a single ultrasound anomaly (n = 99/1773, 5.6%), anomalies in two or more organ systems (n = 77/808, 9.5%), isolated growth abnormalities (n = 2/76, 2.6%), and soft markers (n = 2/77, 2.6%). The following anomalies in isolation or with additional anomalies had particularly high detection rates: holoprosencephaly (n = 9/85, 10.6%), posterior fossa defects (n = 21/144, 14.6%), skeletal anomalies (n = 15/140, 10.7%), ventricular septal defect (n = 14/132, 10.6%), hypoplastic left heart (n = 11/68, 16.2%), and cleft lip/palate (n = 14/136, 10.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Microarray analysis identified clinically significant genomic alterations in 6.5% of cases with one or more abnormal ultrasound findings; the majority were below the resolution of karyotyping. Larger data sets such as this allow for sub-stratification by specific anomalies to determine risks for genomic alterations detectable by microarray analysis.

Experience with microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization for prenatal diagnosis in over 5000 pregnancies

Objective

To demonstrate the usefulness of microarray testing in prenatal diagnosis based on our laboratory experience.

Methods

Prenatal samples received from 2004 to 2011 for a variety of indications (n = 5003) were tested using comparative genomic hybridization-based microarrays targeted to known chromosomal syndromes with later versions of the microarrays providing backbone coverage of the entire genome.

Results

The overall detection rate of clinically significant copy number alterations (CNAs) among unbiased, nondemise cases was 5.3%. Detection rates were 6.5% and 8.2% for cases referred with abnormal ultrasounds and fetal demise, respectively. The overall rate of findings with unclear clinical significance was 4.2% but would reduce to 0.39% if only de novo CNAs were considered. In cases with known chromosomal rearrangements in the fetus or parent, 41.1% showed CNAs related to the rearrangements, whereas 1.3% showed clinically significant CNAs unrelated to the karyotype. Finally, 71% of the clinically significant CNAs found by microarray were below the resolution of conventional karyotyping of fetal chromosomes.

Conclusions

Microarray analysis has advantages over conventional cytogenetics, including the ability to more precisely characterize CNAs associated with abnormal karyotypes. Moreover, a significant proportion of cases studied by array will show a clinically significant CNA even with apparently normal karyotypes. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.