Mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis: Prenatal diagnosis, molecular genetic analysis and literature review

Prenatal diagnosis of a trisomy 7 mosaic case: CMA, CNV-seq, karyotyping, interphase FISH, and MS-MLPA, which technique to choose?

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to perform a prenatal genetic diagnosis of a high-risk fetus with trisomy 7 identified by noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and to evaluate the efficacy of different genetic testing techniques for prenatal diagnosis of trisomy mosaicism.

METHODS

For prenatal diagnosis of a pregnant woman with a high risk of trisomy 7 suggested by NIPT, karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) were performed on an amniotic fluid sample. Low-depth whole-genome copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were used to clarify the results further. In addition, methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MS-MLPA) was performed to analyze the possibility of uniparental disomy(UPD).

RESULTS

Amniotic fluid karyotype analysis revealed a 46, XX result. Approximately 20% mosaic trisomy 7 was detected according to the CMA result. About 16% and 4% of mosaicism was detected by CNV-seq and FISH, respectively. MS-MLPA showed no methylation abnormalities. The fetal ultrasound did not show any detectable abnormalities except for mild intrauterine growth retardation seen at 39 weeks of gestation. After receiving genetic counseling, the expectant mother decided to continue the pregnancy, and follow-up within three months of delivery was normal.

CONCLUSION

In high-risk NIPT diagnosis, a combination of cytogenetic and molecular genetic techniques proves fruitful in detecting low-level mosaicism. Furthermore, the exclusion of UPD on chromosome 7 remains crucial when NIPT indicates a positive prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 7.

Application of various genetic analysis techniques for detecting two rare cases of 9p duplication mosaicism during prenatal diagnosis

BACKGROUND

The identification of genetic mosaicism and the genetic counseling needed following its discovery have been challenging problems in the field of prenatal diagnosis. Herein, we describe the clinical phenotypes and various prenatal diagnostic processes used for two rare cases of 9p duplication mosaicism and review the prior literature in the field to evaluate the merits of different methods for diagnosing mosaic 9p duplication.

METHODS

We recorded ultrasound examinations, reported the screening and diagnosis pathways, and analyzed the mosaic levels of the two cases of 9p duplication using karyotype analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), and fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis (FISH).

RESULTS

Case 1 had a normal clinical phenotype for tetrasomy 9p mosaicism, and Case 2 showed multiple malformations caused by both trisomy 9 and trisomy 9p mosaicism. Both cases were initially suspected after non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPT) based on cell-free DNA. The mosaic ratio of 9p duplication found via karyotyping was lower than what was discovered by CMA and FISH, in both cases. Contrary to previous findings, the mosaic level of trisomy 9 found by karyotype analysis was greater than what was found by CMA, in terms of complex mosaicism involving trisomy 9 and trisomy 9p, in Case 2.

CONCLUSION

NIPT can indicate 9p duplication mosaicism during prenatal screening. Different strengths and limitations existed in terms of diagnosing mosaic 9p duplication by karyotype analysis, CMA, and FISH. The combined use of various methods may be capable of more accurately determining break-points and mosaic levels of 9p duplication during prenatal diagnosis.

Low-level mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis without uniparental disomy 15 in a pregnancy associated with cytogenetic discrepancy between uncultured amniocytes and cultured amniocytes, a favorable fetal outcome and perinatal decrease of the aneuploid cell line

OBJECTIVE

We present low-level mosaic trisomy 15 without uniparental disomy (UPD) 15 in a pregnancy associated with cytogenetic discrepancy between uncultured amniocytes and cultured amniocytes, a favorable fetal outcome and perinatal decrease of the aneuploid cell line.

CASE REPORT

A 40-year-old, gravida 2, para 0, woman underwent amniocentesis at 16 weeks of gestation because advanced maternal age. This pregnancy was conceived by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Amniocentesis revealed a karyotype of 47,XX,+15 [7]/46,XX [43]. Simultaneous array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) analysis on the DNA extracted from uncultured amniocytes revealed arr (15) × 2-3 (X) × 2 with 14% mosaicism for trisomy 15, and ME028 multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) methylation test excluded UPD 15. Prenatal ultrasound and parental karyotypes were normal. She was referred for genetic counseling, and repeat amniocentesis performed at 28 weeks of gestation revealed 46, XX (20/20 colonies) in cultured amniocytes, and in uncultured amniocytes, interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed 13.7% (16/117 cells) mosaicism for trisomy 15, aCGH analysis revealed arr [GRCh(hg19)] 15q11.22q26.3 (22, 765, 628-102,256,748) × 2.4 with a log₂ ratio = 0.26, consistent with 40% mosaicism for trisomy 15, and quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) assays excluded UPD 15. The woman was encouraged to continue the pregnancy. At 37 weeks of gestation, a 2400-g phenotypically normal female baby was delivered without any abnormality. The cord blood had 46, XX (40/40 cells). QF-PCR assays determined maternal origin of trisomy 15 in the placenta. When follow-up at age 5 months, the neonate was normal in physical and psychomotor development. FISH analysis on 102 buccal mucosal cells detected 2 cells (2%, 2/102 cells) with trisomy 15 signals, compared with 1% in normal control.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-level mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis without UPD 15 can be a transient and benign condition, and can be associated with a favorable fetal outcome and perinatal decrease of the aneuploid cell line.

Angelman syndrome with mosaic paternal uniparental disomy suggestive of mitotic nondisjunction

Angelman syndrome (AS) is caused by the functional absence of the maternal ubiquitin-protein ligase E3A (UBE3A) gene. Approximately 5% of AS is caused by paternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 15 (UPD(15)pat), most of which is considered to result from monosomy rescue. However, little attention has focused on how UPD(15)pat occurs. We suggest the mitotic nondisjunction mechanism as a cause of UPD(15)pat in a six-year-old patient presenting with distinctive characteristics in line with AS. DNA methylation screening of 15q11-q13 showed a paternal band and a faint maternal band, suggestive of mosaic status. By trio-based microsatellite analysis, we confirmed a large proportion of UPD(15)pat cells and a small proportion of cells of biparental origin. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray revealed isodisomy of the entire chromosome 15. These results suggest that the UPD(15)pat of the patient resulted from mitotic nondisjunction, which may also be the cause of other cases of AS with UPD(15)pat.

Cytogenetic discrepancy between uncultured amniocytes and cultured amniocytes in mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis in a pregnancy with a favorable outcome

OBJECTIVE

We present prenatal diagnosis of mosaic trisomy 15 in a pregnancy with a favorable outcome.

CASE REPORT

A 33-year-old, primigravid woman underwent amniocentesis at 19 weeks of gestation because non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) revealed gene dosage increase at chromosome 15. Cytogenetic analysis revealed a karyotype of 47,XX,+15[10]/46,XX[13]. Using uncultured amniocytes, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) revealed arr [GRCh37] (X) × 2, (15) × 3 [0.75], multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) analysis showed rsa [GRCh36] 15q11q13 (21,362,818-27,196,819) × 3 [0.76] and methylation-specific (MS)-MLPA analysis showed a methylation index = 0.41 with paternal gene dosage increase at 15q11-q13. Repeat amniocentesis at 25 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 47,XX,+15[6]/46,XX[14]. Using uncultured amniocytes, quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) assays excluded uniparental disomy (UPD) 15 and determined a paternal origin of the extra chromosome 15, aCGH analysis showed 75%-80% mosaicism for trisomy 15, and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed 45.5% (46/101 cells) mosaicism for trisomy 15. Repeat amniocentesis at 28 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 47,XX,+15[2]/46,XX[23]. Using uncultured amniocytes, aCGH showed 75-80% mosaicism for trisomy 15, and FISH showed 70.6% (72/102 cells) mosaicism for trisomy 15. Using cultured amniocytes, QF-PCR assays excluded UPD 15. Cordocentesis at 30 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 47,XX,+15[2]/46,XX[138]. Using cord blood, aCGH revealed 9% gene dosage increase at chromosome 15, and MS-MLPA analysis excluded UPD 15. At 36 weeks of gestation, a 2060-g phenotypically normal baby was delivered. The cord blood had 46, XX (40/40 cells). The placenta had 47,XX,+15 (40/40 cells). QF-PCR analysis on placenta showed a paternal origin of trisomy 15. FISH analysis on buccal mucosal cells at age 20 days showed 20% (20/100 cells) mosaicism for trisomy 15.

CONCLUSION

Cytogenetic discrepancy may occur between uncultured and cultured amniocytes in mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis. Cultured amniocytes may present progressive decrease in the levels of mosaicism for trisomy 15 as the fetus grows. Mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis without UPD 15 can be associated with a favorable outcome.

Prenatal diagnosis of a novel 7q31.31q31.33 microduplication with a favorable outcome

Background

Copy number variants (CNVs) are an important source of normal and pathogenic genome variations. Especially CNVs identified in prenatal cases need careful considerations and correct interpretation if those are harmless or harmful variants from the norm.

Case presentation

Herein, we reported a paternally inherited duplication of 7.6 Mb in 7q31.3 with, surprisingly, a favorable outcome. GTG-banding and CMA on the DNA derived from uncultured amniocytes revealed a karyotype: 46,XX.arr[GRCh37] 7q31.31q31.33(118,601,001_126,177,044) × 3. Ultrasound examination showed no dysmorphisms or intrauterine growth restriction in the fetus and the father was clinically normal as well.

Conclusion

Prenatal detection of a 7.6 Mb in 7q31.31 to 7q31.33 duplication in a female fetus turned out to be a yet unreported unbalanced chromosome abnormality. This is another example that parental testing and GTG-banding are necessary additional tests to be done in prenatal cases, before a reliable conclusion on the meaning of an aberration can be drawn.

Prenatal diagnosis of a familial Y long-arm and chromosome 15 short-arm translocation inherited from a mother carrier

OBJECTIVE

We present prenatal diagnosis of a familial Y long-arm and chromosome 15 short-arm translocation inherited from a mother carrier.

CASE REPORT

A 34-year-old primigravid woman underwent amniocentesis at 20 weeks of gestation because of advanced maternal age. Amniocentesis revealed a derived chromosome 15 or 15p+ with an additional material on the short arm of chromosome 15. Cytogenetic analysis of the parents revealed that the phenotypically normal mother carried the same 15p+ variant, and the father had a karyotype of 46,XY. Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) analysis on the DNA extracted from cultured amniocytes revealed no genomic imbalance. Polymorphic DNA marker analysis using the DNAs extracted from cultured amniocytes and parental bloods excluded uniparental disomy (UPD) 15. C-banded preparations and metaphase fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis using a Yq12-specific probe showed a positive stain on the 15p+, indicating the origin of Yq on the short arm of the derivative chromosome 15. The karyotype of amniocentesis was 46,XX,der(15)t(Y;15)(q12;p13)mat. The mother had a karyotype of 46,XX,der(15) t(Y;15)(q12;p13). At 39 weeks of gestation, a 3006-g healthy female baby was delivered with no phenotypic abnormality. During follow-up at age six months, she manifested normal physical and psychomotor development.

CONCLUSION

Prenatal diagnosis of a 15p+ variant should include a differential diagnosis of genomic imbalance and UPD 15, and aCGH and polymorphic DNA marker analyses are useful under such a circumstance.

Cytogenetic discrepancy between uncultured amniocytes and cultured amniocytes in mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis

OBJECTIVE

We present mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 41-year-old woman underwent amniocentesis at 16 weeks of gestation because of an abnormal non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) result suspicious of trisomy 15. Amniocentesis revealed a karyotype of 46,XY. Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) on uncultured amniocytes revealed 26% mosaicism for trisomy 15. She was referred for repeat amniocentesis. aCGH, interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) assays and/or conventional cytogenetic analysis were applied on various cells and tissues including uncultured amniocytes, cultured amniocytes, cord blood, placenta, parental bloods and/or buccal mucosal cells.

RESULTS

Repeat amniocentesis at 21 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 46, XY in cultured amniocytes, and 30% mosaicism for trisomy 15 by aCGH and 32% mosaicism for trisomy 15 by FISH in uncultured amniocytes. Repeat amniocentesis at 29 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 46, XY in cultured amniocytes, and 15% mosaicism for trisomy 15 by aCGH and 7.2% mosaicism for trisomy 15 by FISH in uncultured amniocytes. QF-PCR on cultured amniocytes excluded uniparental disomy (UPD) 15. A phenotypically normal baby was delivered subsequently with a karyotype of 46, XY in cord blood and 2% mosaicism for trisomy 15 by FISH in buccal mucosal cells. The aCGH analysis revealed trisomy 15 in placenta and no genomic imbalance in cord blood. QF-PCR assays determined a maternal origin of trisomy 15 in placenta.

CONCLUSION

Cytogenetic discrepancy may occur between uncultured and cultured amniocytes in mosaic trisomy 15 at amniocentesis. The cells of trisomy 15 cell line in prenatally detected mosaic trisomy 15 may decrease in number as the fetus grows. Whenever NIPT suspects trisomy 15, a confirmatory amniocentesis should include genetic analysis on both uncultured and cultured amniocytes to exclude mosaic trisomy 15 and maternal UPD 15, especially when the cultured amniocytes have a normal karyotype.

Prenatal diagnosis of maternal uniparental disomy 16 associated with mosaic trisomy 16 at amniocentesis, and pericardial effusion and intrauterine growth restriction in the fetus

OBJECTIVE

We present prenatal diagnosis of maternal uniparental disomy (UPD) 16 associated with mosaic trisomy 16 at amniocentesis, and pericardial effusion and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) in the fetus.

CASE REPORT

A 38-year-old woman underwent amniocentesis at 17 weeks of gestation because of advanced maternal age, and the result was 47,XX,+16[2]/46,XX[54]. Simultaneous array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) analysis on the DNA extracted from uncultured amniocytes revealed 14% mosaicism for trisomy 16 and a paternally inherited 319-kb microdeletion of 15q11.2 encompassing the genes of TUBGCP5, CYFIP1, NIPA2 and NIPA1. Prenatal ultrasound revealed persistent left superior vena cava, pericardial effusion and severe IUGR. Cordocentesis at 23 weeks of gestation revealed a karyotype of 46,XX, but polymorphic DNA marker analysis revealed maternal UPD 16. Repeat amniocentesis was performed at 27 weeks of gestation and revealed a karyotype of 46, XX in 21/21 colonies. Molecular cytogenetic analysis on uncultured amniocytes revealed 22.4% mosaicism (26/116 cells) for trisomy 16 on interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis, and 20% mosaicism for trisomy 16 on aCGH. Polymorphic DNA marker analysis on the DNAs extracted from uncultured amniocytes and parental bloods revealed maternal UPD 16. The pregnancy was subsequently terminated, and a fetus was delivered with facial dysmorphism and severe IUGR. The umbilical cord had a karyotype of 47,XX,+16[28]/46,XX[16]. Polymorphic DNA marker analysis on placenta confirmed a maternal origin of trisomy 16.

CONCLUSION

Cytogenetic discrepancy between cultured amniocytes and uncultured amniocytes may present in mosaic trisomy 16 at amniocentesis. Prenatal diagnosis of mosaic trisomy 16 should alert the association of maternal UPD 16 which may be associated with congenital heart defects and severe IUGR on prenatal ultrasound.

Integrated CNV-seq, karyotyping and SNP-array analyses for effective prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism

BACKGROUND

Emerging studies suggest that low-coverage massively parallel copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq) more sensitive than chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for detecting low-level mosaicism. However, a retrospective back-to-back comparison evaluating accuracy, efficacy, and incremental yield of CNV-seq compared with CMA is warranted.

METHODS

A total of 72 mosaicism cases identified by karyotyping or CMA were recruited to the study. There were 67 mosaic samples co-analysed by CMA and CNV-seq, comprising 40 with sex chromosome aneuploidy, 22 with autosomal aneuploidy and 5 with large cryptic genomic rearrangements.

RESULTS

Of the 67 positive mosaic cases, the levels of mosaicism defined by CNV-seq ranged from 6 to 92% compared to the ratio from 3 to 90% by karyotyping and 20% to 72% by CMA. CNV-seq not only identified all 43 chromosomal aneuploidies or large cryptic genomic rearrangements detected by CMA, but also provided a 34.88% (15/43) increased yield compared with CMA. The improved yield of mosaicism detection by CNV-seq was largely due to the ability to detect low level mosaicism below 20%.

CONCLUSION

In the context of prenatal diagnosis, CNV-seq identified additional and clinically significant mosaicism with enhanced resolution and increased sensitivity. This study provides strong evidence for applying CNV-seq as an alternative to CMA for detection of aneuploidy and mosaic variants.

The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

To compare karyotype and chromosomal microarray (CMA) analysis of aneuploid chromosome mosaicism in amniocentesis samples.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 2091 amniocentesis samples from pregnant women were collected from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Karyotype analysis was performed using G-banding and CMA analysis used the Affymetrix CytoScan 750K SNP microarray.

RESULT

Thirteen cases with aneuploid chromosome mosaicism were detected and compared between the karyotype and CMA methods. Seven of these cases were trisomic mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism calculated from CMA were higher than those detected from karyotype analysis; noting three cases of trisomy mosaicism were not detected by karyotype analysis. Four cases exhibited monomeric mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism detected in three of these cases were higher in karyotype compared with CMA analysis; one case had equivalent levels of monomeric mosaicism from both karyotype and CMA analysis. Two other cases from karyotype analysis were a mix of monosomic and trisomic mosaicism, whereas the CMA result was restricted to monosomic mosaicism for these cases.

CONCLUSION

Both karyotype and CMA analysis can be used to detect aneuploid chromosome mosaicism. However, the two methods produced different results. CMA and karyotype analysis have their own advantages in detecting aneuploid mosaicism, and the combination of these methods provides a more rigorous diagnosis.

Mosaic trisomy 15 and prenatal genetic counselling: a case of Prader-Willi syndrome due to maternal uniparental disomy

Background

Chromosome abnormalities are a frequent finding in prenatal invasive testing for fetal malformations and/or growth retardation.

Case presentation

We present a case of low level (8%) mosaic trisomy 15 detected on amniocentesis after fetal heart anomalies and IUGR (intrauterine growth retardation) were found on routine scan. Postnatal karyotype confirmed a very low level (2%) mosaicism in the skin but not in blood lymphocytes or in the urine. Methylation specific testing of chromosome 15 showed maternal uniparental disomy and consequently the newborn was diagnosed with Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS).

Conclusions

This case illustrates the need of further genetic testing in all trisomy 15 mosaicisms detected in prenatal invasive testing in order to screen for PWS, a more frequent entity than trisomy 15, altogether providing appropriate genetic counseling and adequate clinical management. The recommendation is applicable to prenatally detected mosaic trisomies of other chromosomes carrying imprinted genes, such as 7, 11 and 14.

Higher male prevalence of chromosomal mosaicism detected by amniocentesis

OBJECTIVE

To present the calculated frequencies, male to female sex-ratio, and modes of ascertainments in different levels of chromosomal mosaicism (CM) detected at amniocentesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This's a 10-years retrospective study between January 2008 and December 2017 and there were 13,752 cases of amniocentesis performed in MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. Eight hundred and thirty four cases of CM were collected in this study. We reviewed their types of chromosomal abnormalities of mosaicism, the modes of ascertainment (including: advanced maternal age, abnormal ultrasound findings, abnormal maternal serum screening result, and other reasons), maternal age, gestational age at amniocentesis, fetal gender, and perinatal findings. After amniocentesis, in situ culture was performed and the results of karyotype with CM were divided in to three levels.

RESULTS

In our sample of 13,752 amniocentesis, 834 cases with all levels of CM were collected in this study. Of them, there were 562 cases (4.09%) with level I mosaicism, 207 cases (1.51%) of level II mosaicism, and 65 cases (0.47%) of level III mosaicism (Table 1). In the group of advanced of maternal age (AMA), their calculated frequencies, 4.18% in level I, 1.46% in level II and 0.41% in level III, were very similar to those in total cases (p value = 0.206) without statistical significance. In the group of abnormal ultrasound findings, the calculated frequency was much higher in level III (0.87%), however, there was no statistical significance because of the small numbers of level III. In our cases of amniocentesis, the case numbers of male case (50.20%) is very similar to female (49.80%), and the male to female ratio was 1.01. But, we found more cases of male with CM (444 cases) than female (390 cases). The sex-ratio in different levels' calculated frequencies of CM showed similar in level I, and male prevalence was found in level II and III with statistical significance (p value = 0.022). The male prevalence also revealed in both numerical and structural abnormalities in level II and level III, but no difference in the cases of level I.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our observation showed a novel finding of higher male prevalence of CM in level II and III, and both in numerical and structural abnormalities. It's consistent with the theory of better survival in male embryo after partial self-correction of initial chromosomal aberrations, male-specific selection against chromosomal abnormalities.

Comprehensive meta-analysis reveals association between multiple imprinting disorders and conception by assisted reproductive technology

PURPOSE

To determine whether a history of conception by assisted reproductive technology (ART) is associated with occurrence of one or more imprinting disorders of either maternal or paternal origin.

METHODS

We implemented a systematic review of scholarly literature followed by comprehensive meta-analysis to quantitatively synthesize data from reports relating to use of ART to occurrence of any imprinting disorder of humans, including Beckwith-Wiedemann (BWS), Angelman (AS), Prader-Willi (PWS), and Silver-Russell (SRS) syndromes, as well as transient neonatal diabetes mellitus (TNDB) and sporadic retinoblasoma (RB).

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 13 reports presenting unique data from 23 studies that related conception following ART to occurrence of imprinting disorders. Multiple studies of four disorder were identified, for which meta-analysis yielded the following summary estimates of associations with a history of ART: AS, summary odds ratio (sOR) = 4.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-8.5, 4 studies); BWS, sOR = 5.8 (95% CI 3.1-11.1, 8 studies); PWS, sOR = 2.2 (95% CI 1.6-3.0, 6 studies); SRS, sOR = 11.3 (95% CI 4.5-28.5, 3 studies). Only one study reported on each of TNDB and RB.

CONCLUSION

Published data reveal positive associations between history of ART conception and each of four imprinting disorders. Reasons for these associations warrant further investigation.