与产前微阵列相比,全基因组cfDNA拷贝数变异的实验室表现。

IF 1.3 4区 生物学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Erica Soster, John Tynan, Clare Gibbons, Wendy Meschino, Jenna Wardrop, Eyad Almasri, Stuart Schwartz, Graham McLennan
{"title":"与产前微阵列相比,全基因组cfDNA拷贝数变异的实验室表现。","authors":"Erica Soster,&nbsp;John Tynan,&nbsp;Clare Gibbons,&nbsp;Wendy Meschino,&nbsp;Jenna Wardrop,&nbsp;Eyad Almasri,&nbsp;Stuart Schwartz,&nbsp;Graham McLennan","doi":"10.1186/s13039-023-00642-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows for screening of fetal aneuploidy and copy number variants (CNVs) from cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal plasma. Professional societies have not yet embraced NIPT for fetal CNVs, citing a need for additional performance data. A clinically available genome-wide cfDNA test screens for fetal aneuploidy and CNVs larger than 7 megabases (Mb).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study reviews 701 pregnancies with \"high risk\" indications for fetal aneuploidy which underwent both genome-wide cfDNA and prenatal microarray. For aneuploidies and CNVs considered 'in-scope' for the cfDNA test (CNVs ≥ 7 Mb and select microdeletions), sensitivity and specificity was 93.8% and 97.3% respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 63.8% and 99.7% as compared to microarray. When including 'out-of-scope' CNVs on array as false negatives, the sensitivity of cfDNA falls to 48.3%. If only pathogenic out-of-scope CNVs are treated as false negatives, the sensitivity is 63.8%. Of the out-of-scope CNVs identified by array smaller than 7 Mb, 50% were classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), with an overall VUS rate in the study of 2.29%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While microarray provides the most robust assessment of fetal CNVs, this study suggests that genome-wide cfDNA can reliably screen for large CNVs in a high-risk cohort. Informed consent and adequate pretest counseling are essential to ensuring patients understand the benefits and limitations of all prenatal testing and screening options.</p>","PeriodicalId":19099,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Cytogenetics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10257834/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laboratory performance of genome-wide cfDNA for copy number variants as compared to prenatal microarray.\",\"authors\":\"Erica Soster,&nbsp;John Tynan,&nbsp;Clare Gibbons,&nbsp;Wendy Meschino,&nbsp;Jenna Wardrop,&nbsp;Eyad Almasri,&nbsp;Stuart Schwartz,&nbsp;Graham McLennan\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13039-023-00642-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows for screening of fetal aneuploidy and copy number variants (CNVs) from cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal plasma. Professional societies have not yet embraced NIPT for fetal CNVs, citing a need for additional performance data. A clinically available genome-wide cfDNA test screens for fetal aneuploidy and CNVs larger than 7 megabases (Mb).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study reviews 701 pregnancies with \\\"high risk\\\" indications for fetal aneuploidy which underwent both genome-wide cfDNA and prenatal microarray. For aneuploidies and CNVs considered 'in-scope' for the cfDNA test (CNVs ≥ 7 Mb and select microdeletions), sensitivity and specificity was 93.8% and 97.3% respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 63.8% and 99.7% as compared to microarray. When including 'out-of-scope' CNVs on array as false negatives, the sensitivity of cfDNA falls to 48.3%. If only pathogenic out-of-scope CNVs are treated as false negatives, the sensitivity is 63.8%. Of the out-of-scope CNVs identified by array smaller than 7 Mb, 50% were classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), with an overall VUS rate in the study of 2.29%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While microarray provides the most robust assessment of fetal CNVs, this study suggests that genome-wide cfDNA can reliably screen for large CNVs in a high-risk cohort. Informed consent and adequate pretest counseling are essential to ensuring patients understand the benefits and limitations of all prenatal testing and screening options.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Molecular Cytogenetics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10257834/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Molecular Cytogenetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13039-023-00642-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Cytogenetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13039-023-00642-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:无创产前检测(NIPT)允许筛选胎儿非整倍体和拷贝数变异(CNVs)来自母体血浆中的无细胞DNA (cfDNA)。由于需要更多的性能数据,专业协会尚未接受NIPT用于胎儿CNVs。临床可用的全基因组cfDNA检测筛选胎儿非整倍体和大于7兆碱基(Mb)的CNVs。结果:本研究回顾了701例胎儿非整倍体“高风险”指征的妊娠,这些妊娠均进行了全基因组cfDNA和产前微阵列检测。对于cfDNA检测的非整倍体和CNVs (CNVs≥7 Mb和选择的微缺失),与微阵列相比,敏感性和特异性分别为93.8%和97.3%,阳性和阴性预测值分别为63.8%和99.7%。当包括阵列上的“范围外”cnv作为假阴性时,cfDNA的灵敏度降至48.3%。如果仅将致病性范围外的CNVs作为假阴性处理,灵敏度为63.8%。在小于7 Mb的阵列识别出的范围外CNVs中,50%被归类为不确定显著性变异(VUS),研究中VUS的总体发生率为2.29%。结论:虽然微阵列提供了胎儿CNVs最可靠的评估,但本研究表明,全基因组cfDNA可以可靠地筛选高风险队列中的大CNVs。知情同意和充分的孕前咨询对于确保患者了解所有产前检查和筛查选择的好处和局限性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Laboratory performance of genome-wide cfDNA for copy number variants as compared to prenatal microarray.

Laboratory performance of genome-wide cfDNA for copy number variants as compared to prenatal microarray.

Laboratory performance of genome-wide cfDNA for copy number variants as compared to prenatal microarray.

Laboratory performance of genome-wide cfDNA for copy number variants as compared to prenatal microarray.

Background: Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows for screening of fetal aneuploidy and copy number variants (CNVs) from cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal plasma. Professional societies have not yet embraced NIPT for fetal CNVs, citing a need for additional performance data. A clinically available genome-wide cfDNA test screens for fetal aneuploidy and CNVs larger than 7 megabases (Mb).

Results: This study reviews 701 pregnancies with "high risk" indications for fetal aneuploidy which underwent both genome-wide cfDNA and prenatal microarray. For aneuploidies and CNVs considered 'in-scope' for the cfDNA test (CNVs ≥ 7 Mb and select microdeletions), sensitivity and specificity was 93.8% and 97.3% respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 63.8% and 99.7% as compared to microarray. When including 'out-of-scope' CNVs on array as false negatives, the sensitivity of cfDNA falls to 48.3%. If only pathogenic out-of-scope CNVs are treated as false negatives, the sensitivity is 63.8%. Of the out-of-scope CNVs identified by array smaller than 7 Mb, 50% were classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), with an overall VUS rate in the study of 2.29%.

Conclusions: While microarray provides the most robust assessment of fetal CNVs, this study suggests that genome-wide cfDNA can reliably screen for large CNVs in a high-risk cohort. Informed consent and adequate pretest counseling are essential to ensuring patients understand the benefits and limitations of all prenatal testing and screening options.

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
Molecular Cytogenetics
Molecular Cytogenetics GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Molecular Cytogenetics encompasses all aspects of chromosome biology and the application of molecular cytogenetic techniques in all areas of biology and medicine, including structural and functional organization of the chromosome and nucleus, genome variation, expression and evolution, chromosome abnormalities and genomic variations in medical genetics and tumor genetics. Molecular Cytogenetics primarily defines a large set of the techniques that operate either with the entire genome or with specific targeted DNA sequences. Topical areas include, but are not limited to: -Structural and functional organization of chromosome and nucleus- Genome variation, expression and evolution- Animal and plant molecular cytogenetics and genomics- Chromosome abnormalities and genomic variations in clinical genetics- Applications in preimplantation, pre- and post-natal diagnosis- Applications in the central nervous system, cancer and haematology research- Previously unreported applications of molecular cytogenetic techniques- Development of new techniques or significant enhancements to established techniques. This journal is a source for numerous scientists all over the world, who wish to improve or introduce molecular cytogenetic techniques into their practice.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信