Margot Comel, Marina Lamairia, Odile Boute, Camille Cenni, Anne Bergougnoux, Mireille Cossée, Michel Koenig, Luke Mansard, Marie-Claire Vincent
{"title":"母体嵌合体在无创产前诊断中的挑战。","authors":"Margot Comel, Marina Lamairia, Odile Boute, Camille Cenni, Anne Bergougnoux, Mireille Cossée, Michel Koenig, Luke Mansard, Marie-Claire Vincent","doi":"10.1002/pd.6868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report the incidental detection of maternal somatic mosaicism during the development of exclusion-based non-invasive prenatal diagnosis for monogenic disorders (NIPD-MD) initially indicated for apparently de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A droplet digital PCR (ddPCR)-based exclusion NIPD_MD assay was developed for four couples, each with a prior pregnancy affected by a rare autosomal dominant or X-linked condition due to a de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant. Assays were designed to detect fetal-specific variants in maternal plasma, with validation performed on parental and proband samples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In four cases, maternal somatic mosaicism (3%-9%) among 70 personalized NIPD_MD (5.7%) was identified during assay validation, rendering NIPD_MD infeasible due to interference from maternal alleles. Each couple was informed of the elevated recurrence risk. Depending on their preferences, invasive prenatal testing or intensive ultrasound follow-up was undertaken. Retrospective analysis of maternal sequencing data confirmed low-level mosaicism that had been filtered out during routine analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These cases underscore a key limitation of exclusion NIPD_MD when maternal mosaicism is present. Its identification is essential for accurate recurrence risk estimation and genetic counseling. Sensitive detection methods, careful pre-test evaluation, and transparent communication are critical to ensure informed reproductive decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":20387,"journal":{"name":"Prenatal Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maternal Mosaicism Challenges in Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis.\",\"authors\":\"Margot Comel, Marina Lamairia, Odile Boute, Camille Cenni, Anne Bergougnoux, Mireille Cossée, Michel Koenig, Luke Mansard, Marie-Claire Vincent\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pd.6868\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report the incidental detection of maternal somatic mosaicism during the development of exclusion-based non-invasive prenatal diagnosis for monogenic disorders (NIPD-MD) initially indicated for apparently de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A droplet digital PCR (ddPCR)-based exclusion NIPD_MD assay was developed for four couples, each with a prior pregnancy affected by a rare autosomal dominant or X-linked condition due to a de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant. Assays were designed to detect fetal-specific variants in maternal plasma, with validation performed on parental and proband samples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In four cases, maternal somatic mosaicism (3%-9%) among 70 personalized NIPD_MD (5.7%) was identified during assay validation, rendering NIPD_MD infeasible due to interference from maternal alleles. Each couple was informed of the elevated recurrence risk. Depending on their preferences, invasive prenatal testing or intensive ultrasound follow-up was undertaken. Retrospective analysis of maternal sequencing data confirmed low-level mosaicism that had been filtered out during routine analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These cases underscore a key limitation of exclusion NIPD_MD when maternal mosaicism is present. Its identification is essential for accurate recurrence risk estimation and genetic counseling. Sensitive detection methods, careful pre-test evaluation, and transparent communication are critical to ensure informed reproductive decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-13\",\"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.6868\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.6868","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Maternal Mosaicism Challenges in Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis.
Objective: To report the incidental detection of maternal somatic mosaicism during the development of exclusion-based non-invasive prenatal diagnosis for monogenic disorders (NIPD-MD) initially indicated for apparently de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants.
Method: A droplet digital PCR (ddPCR)-based exclusion NIPD_MD assay was developed for four couples, each with a prior pregnancy affected by a rare autosomal dominant or X-linked condition due to a de novo pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant. Assays were designed to detect fetal-specific variants in maternal plasma, with validation performed on parental and proband samples.
Results: In four cases, maternal somatic mosaicism (3%-9%) among 70 personalized NIPD_MD (5.7%) was identified during assay validation, rendering NIPD_MD infeasible due to interference from maternal alleles. Each couple was informed of the elevated recurrence risk. Depending on their preferences, invasive prenatal testing or intensive ultrasound follow-up was undertaken. Retrospective analysis of maternal sequencing data confirmed low-level mosaicism that had been filtered out during routine analysis.
Conclusion: These cases underscore a key limitation of exclusion NIPD_MD when maternal mosaicism is present. Its identification is essential for accurate recurrence risk estimation and genetic counseling. Sensitive detection methods, careful pre-test evaluation, and transparent communication are critical to ensure informed reproductive decision-making.
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