A gradual change of chromosome mosaicism from placenta to fetus leading to T18 false negative result by NIPS

Relationships among maternal monosomy X mosaicism, maternal trisomy, and discordant sex chromosome aneuploidies

OBJECTIVE

To explore the impact of maternal factors on the false-positive fetal sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) results obtained through noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed pregnant women with high-risk SCAs as revealed using NIPS between January 2017 and December 2022. Clinical data such as results of invasive prenatal diagnoses, copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq) and pregnancy outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Overall, 177 (0.6 %) women with SCA-positive results were collected from 27,941 patients who had undergone NIPS. Among them, 110 (62.2 %) pregnant women chose prenatal diagnosis and 39 (35.5 %) cases were confirmed. For the women with monosomy X false-positive results from the NIPS, 53.1 % (17/32) were found to be maternal mosaicism monosomy X. In cases with 47, XXX false-positive results, 60 % (6/10) of them were maternal 47,XXX (5 cases) or maternal mosaicism 47,XXX (1 case). One (1/6, 16.7 %) case of maternal mosaicism monosomy X was detected in the false positive results of 47, XXY/47, XYY revealed. The incidence rate of maternal sex chromosome abnormalities was positively correlated with the Z-score of ChrX. When the Z-score of ChrX ≥ 15, more than 50 % of pregnant women were found to be maternal sex chromosome abnormalities, and when Z-score ≥ 30, the incidence rate was as high as 100 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal monosomy X mosaicism and trisomy X respectively played an important role in the discordance of 45, X and 47, XXX revealed by NIPS. CNV-seq was recommended for the pregnant women at risk of maternal sex chromosome abnormalities, which could help clinicians to provide more accurate and efficient advice during genetic counseling and to guide appropriate prenatal diagnosis strategy for the next pregnancy.

Combined Z-scores to assess the impact of rare autosomal trisomies that results in non-invasive prenatal screening on pregnancy outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to combine Z-scores to evaluate the effects of rare autosomal trisomies (RATs) in non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) on pregnancy outcomes at a single center.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinical data of women with high-risk RATs results using NIPS at a single center between January 2017 and December 2021. NIPS-positive results were separated into three groups based on the Z-value of RATs (Group1: 6 ≤ Z < 10; Group2: 10 ≤ Z < 15; Group 3: Z ≥ 15). Pregnancy outcomes of women with RATs were compared with the low-risk NIPS group.

RESULTS

Overall, 83 RATs were identified in 23,321 NIPS results at our center. Prenatal diagnosis was conducted for 55 patients, and no case was confirmed, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of zero. Fifteen of these patients had adverse pregnancy outcomes, including delivered preterm and/or birth weight (9/15, 60.0 %), structural abnormalities (4/15, 26.7 %), miscarriage (1/15, 6.7 %), and intrauterine death (1/15, 6.7 %). There were 8 (8/22, 36.4 %) adverse pregnancy outcomes in Group 3, which was significantly higher than that in the low-risk NIPS group (p < 0.01). No significant difference was observed between the control group and Group 1 and Group 2 (p > 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should pay more attention to the RATs results when the Z-score is ≥ 15. The data are available for clinicians to guide the prenatal diagnosis of RATs and pregnancy management.

Maternal Xp22.31 copy-number variations detected in non-invasive prenatal screening effectively guide the prenatal diagnosis of X-linked ichthyosis

Background and aims: X-linked ichthyosis (XLI) is a common recessive genetic disease caused by the deletion of steroid sulfatase (STS) in Xp22.31. Maternal copy-number deletions in Xp22.31 (covering STS) can be considered an incidental benefit of genome-wide cell-free DNA profiling. Here, we explored the accuracy and clinical value of maternal deletions in Xp22.31 during non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS).

Materials and methods: We evaluated 13,156 pregnant women who completed NIPS. The maternal deletions in Xp22.31 revealed by NIPS were confirmed with maternal white blood cells by chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) or copy-number variation sequencing (CNV-seq). Suspected positive women pregnant with male fetuses were informed and provided with prenatal genetic counseling.

Results: Nineteen maternal deletions in Xp22.31 covering STS were detected by NIPS, which were all confirmed, ranging in size from 0.61 to 1.77 Mb. Among them, eleven women with deletions in male fetuses accepted prenatal diagnoses, and finally nine cases of XLI were diagnosed. The nine XLI males had differing degrees of skin abnormalities, and of them, some male members of ten families had symptoms associated with XLI.

Conclusion: NIPS has the potential to detect clinically significant maternal X chromosomal CNVs causing XLI, which can guide the prenatal diagnosis of X-linked ichthyosis and reflect the family history, so as to enhance pregnancy management as well as children and family members’ health management.

Clinical utility of expanded NIPT for chromosomal abnormalities and etiology analysis of cytogenetic discrepancies cases

PURPOSE

This study is to assess the performance of expanded noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in detecting chromosome aneuploidies and chromosome copy number variants (CNVs), and elucidate the discordant cases between NIPT and fetal karyotype.

METHODS

A total of 2139 single pregnancies have been recruited and sequenced with expanded NIPT. Karyotype analysis and CNV sequencing (CNV-seq) of amniotic fluid were performed in 22 of 23 high-risk, three low-risk NIPT pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound findings in the follow-up, and three non-reportable NIPT pregnant women. The genetic investigation of discordant results between NIPT and amniocytes in three cases was proceeded. Placental samples, fetal samples from the limb, hip, umbilical cord, and maternal peripheral blood leukocytes were collected for CNV-Seq.

RESULTS

Expanded NIPT revealed a total of 23 positive pregnancies and yielded the overall positive predictive value (PPV) 65.2%. For T21, T18, and XXY, all the PPV was 100% respectively. For CNVs > 10 Mb and 5-10 Mb, the PPV was 42.8% and 16.7%, respectively. The genetic investigation of placental and fetal samples indicated different levels of placental and fetal mosaicism contributing to two of three verified discordant results.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that screening for CNVs with expanded NIPT is promising although the accuracy rate remains insufficient. The different occurring time of mitotic non-disjunction of different chromosome in early development of embryo results in varying levels of chromosomal mosaicism in different placental and fetal tissues. The result highlights the significance of comprehensive cytogenetic validation of placental and fetal specimens with an inconsistent NIPT results.

Fetomaternal microchimerism and genetic diagnosis: On the origins of fetal cells and cell-free fetal DNA in the pregnant woman

During pregnancy several types of fetal cells and fetal stem cells, including pregnancy-associated progenitor cells (PAPCs), traffic into the maternal circulation. Whereas they also migrate to various maternal organs and adopt the phenotype of the target tissues to contribute to regenerative processes, fetal cells also play a role in the pathogenesis of maternal diseases. In addition, cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) is detectable in the plasma of pregnant women. Together they constitute the well-known phenomenon of fetomaternal microchimerism, which inspired the concept of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using maternal blood. An in-depth knowledge concerning the origins of these fetal cells and cffDNA allows a more comprehensive understanding of the biological relevance of fetomaternal microchimerism and has implications for the ongoing expansion of resultant clinical applications.

Fetal aneuploidy screening by non-invasive prenatal testing of maternal plasma DNA sequencing with "false negative" result due to confined placental mosaicism: A case report

RATIONALE

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is an accurate screening method with high specificity and sensitivity and a low false-positive rate of trisomy 21, 18, and 13. However, false-negative NIPT results could also limit the clinical application of NIPT.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 34-year-old primigravida woman who underwent NIPT at 16 + 3 weeks' gestation was identified as being at high risk for fetal trisomy X (47, XXX). Fetal cardiac defect and hand posture were observed during prenatal ultrasound examination at the 23rd week of gestation.

DIAGNOSES

Amniocentesis conducted at the 24th week of gestation. Fetal karyotyping and FISH identified karyotype 48, XXX, + 18, which indicated that the NIPT failed to detect trisomy 18 in this case.

INTERVENTIONS

The couple decided to terminate pregnancy at the 26th week of gestation and was willing to undergo further examinations.

OUTCOMES

Discordant results between fetus with trisomy 18 and placenta with mosaic T18 were further identified with massive parallel sequencing, which might be due to that the fetal cell-free DNA in maternal plasma for NIPT that was assessed principally originated from the trophoblast cells.

LESSONS

The presence of trisomy 18 mosaicism in the placenta might be the reason for the false-negative NIPT result in this case of double aneuploidy with 48, XXX, + 18, karyotype. Although the NIPT is a valuable screening method that has evident advantages in prenatal aneuploidy screening for certain chromosomal abnormalities compared to other methods, it is not a "diagnostic test" yet.

A rare case of NIPT discrepancy caused by the placental mosaicism of three different karyotypes, 47,XXX, 47,XX,+21, and 48,XXX,+21

Background

Placental mosaicism is one of the major reasons for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) discrepancy. Herein, we discovered a rare case of placenta with complex karyotypes that caused false‐positive and false‐negative results in noninvasive prenatal testing.

Methods

Next‐generation sequencing (NGS) and Quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF‐PCR) were performed on the cord blood sample, fetal tissues, and eight placental biopsies. Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH) and karyotyping were also carried to confirm the fetal genome status.

Results

The results suggested that the fetal chromosome was 47,XXX and the placenta had three karyotypes of 48,XXX,+21, 47,XX,+21, and 47,XXX. QF‐PCR indicated that the extra chromosome 21 and chromosome X were all from the father. It is speculated that the zygote may have 48,XXX,+21 karyotype and trisomy rescue could be the main mechanism for the development of the homogeneous fetus and complex mosaic placenta.

Conclusion

Overall, the complicated nature of our case underlines the importance of discussing with parents the possibility of both atypical and discordant results during preconfirmatory amniocentesis counseling and consent.