在北美的细胞遗传学实验室中,产前鉴定的不确定意义变异的报告标准不同。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Prenatal Diagnosis Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-06 DOI:10.1002/pd.6785
Matthew A Shear, Arun P Wiita, Jingwei Yu, Brette Wayman, Teresa N Sparks, Mary E Norton, Kate Swanson
{"title":"在北美的细胞遗传学实验室中,产前鉴定的不确定意义变异的报告标准不同。","authors":"Matthew A Shear, Arun P Wiita, Jingwei Yu, Brette Wayman, Teresa N Sparks, Mary E Norton, Kate Swanson","doi":"10.1002/pd.6785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Current technical standards for chromosomal microarray (CMA) interpretation are not prescriptive for reporting variants of uncertain significance (VUS) identified prenatally. We sought to compare prenatal CMA reporting among cytogenetic labs and identify potential drivers of practice variation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an electronic cross-sectional survey of cytogeneticists in the United States and Canada from July-December 2023. Participants were identified through the American Cytogenetics Forum List.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Labs reported differences in their size threshold used when reporting CNVs lacking OMIM annotated genes as a VUS, variable use of clinical data such as ultrasound or family history when deciding to report a VUS, and differences in opinion regarding the underlying pathogenicity of certain CNVs. Many cytogeneticists reported concerns about legal liability related to prenatal CMA reporting, and many shared concerns that a patient may terminate a pregnancy based on a VUS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reporting criteria for prenatally identified variants of uncertain significance differs among cytogenetic laboratories in North America. Many possible drivers of this practice variation were identified, including a lack of national guidelines that comprehensively address the unique considerations for prenatal CMA reporting.</p>","PeriodicalId":20387,"journal":{"name":"Prenatal Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":"1359-1365"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reporting Criteria for Prenatally Identified Variants of Uncertain Significance Differs Among Cytogenetics Laboratories in North America.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew A Shear, Arun P Wiita, Jingwei Yu, Brette Wayman, Teresa N Sparks, Mary E Norton, Kate Swanson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pd.6785\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Current technical standards for chromosomal microarray (CMA) interpretation are not prescriptive for reporting variants of uncertain significance (VUS) identified prenatally. We sought to compare prenatal CMA reporting among cytogenetic labs and identify potential drivers of practice variation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an electronic cross-sectional survey of cytogeneticists in the United States and Canada from July-December 2023. Participants were identified through the American Cytogenetics Forum List.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Labs reported differences in their size threshold used when reporting CNVs lacking OMIM annotated genes as a VUS, variable use of clinical data such as ultrasound or family history when deciding to report a VUS, and differences in opinion regarding the underlying pathogenicity of certain CNVs. Many cytogeneticists reported concerns about legal liability related to prenatal CMA reporting, and many shared concerns that a patient may terminate a pregnancy based on a VUS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reporting criteria for prenatally identified variants of uncertain significance differs among cytogenetic laboratories in North America. Many possible drivers of this practice variation were identified, including a lack of national guidelines that comprehensively address the unique considerations for prenatal CMA reporting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1359-1365\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6785\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prenatal Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6785","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:目前的染色体微阵列(CMA)解释技术标准对报告产前鉴定的不确定意义变异(VUS)没有规定。我们试图比较细胞遗传学实验室的产前CMA报告,并确定实践变化的潜在驱动因素。方法:我们从2023年7月至12月对美国和加拿大的细胞遗传学家进行了电子横断面调查。参与者通过美国细胞遗传学论坛名单确定。结果:实验室报告了在报告缺乏OMIM注释基因的CNVs作为VUS时所使用的大小阈值的差异,在决定报告VUS时对临床数据(如超声或家族史)的不同使用,以及对某些CNVs潜在致病性的不同看法。许多细胞遗传学家报告了与产前CMA报告相关的法律责任,许多人都担心患者可能会因为VUS而终止妊娠。结论:在北美的细胞遗传学实验室中,产前鉴定的不确定意义变异的报告标准不同。确定了这种实践变化的许多可能驱动因素,包括缺乏全面解决产前CMA报告独特考虑因素的国家指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reporting Criteria for Prenatally Identified Variants of Uncertain Significance Differs Among Cytogenetics Laboratories in North America.

Objective: Current technical standards for chromosomal microarray (CMA) interpretation are not prescriptive for reporting variants of uncertain significance (VUS) identified prenatally. We sought to compare prenatal CMA reporting among cytogenetic labs and identify potential drivers of practice variation.

Methods: We conducted an electronic cross-sectional survey of cytogeneticists in the United States and Canada from July-December 2023. Participants were identified through the American Cytogenetics Forum List.

Results: Labs reported differences in their size threshold used when reporting CNVs lacking OMIM annotated genes as a VUS, variable use of clinical data such as ultrasound or family history when deciding to report a VUS, and differences in opinion regarding the underlying pathogenicity of certain CNVs. Many cytogeneticists reported concerns about legal liability related to prenatal CMA reporting, and many shared concerns that a patient may terminate a pregnancy based on a VUS.

Conclusion: Reporting criteria for prenatally identified variants of uncertain significance differs among cytogenetic laboratories in North America. Many possible drivers of this practice variation were identified, including a lack of national guidelines that comprehensively address the unique considerations for prenatal CMA reporting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Diagnosis 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
204
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Prenatal Diagnosis welcomes submissions in all aspects of prenatal diagnosis with a particular focus on areas in which molecular biology and genetics interface with prenatal care and therapy, encompassing: all aspects of fetal imaging, including sonography and magnetic resonance imaging; prenatal cytogenetics, including molecular studies and array CGH; prenatal screening studies; fetal cells and cell-free nucleic acids in maternal blood and other fluids; preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD); prenatal diagnosis of single gene disorders, including metabolic disorders; fetal therapy; fetal and placental development and pathology; development and evaluation of laboratory services for prenatal diagnosis; psychosocial, legal, ethical and economic aspects of prenatal diagnosis; prenatal genetic counseling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信