Cargando…
Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study
BACKGROUND: In the past 30 years karyotyping was the gold standard for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aberrations in the fetus. Traditional karyotyping (TKT) has a high accuracy and reliability. However, it is labor intensive, the results take 14–21 days, the costs are high and unwanted findings...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2405770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18492228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-8-18 |
_version_ | 1782155648034668544 |
---|---|
author | Boormans, Elisabeth MA Birnie, Erwin Wildschut, Hajo I Schuring-Blom, Heleen G Oepkes, Dick van Oppen, Carla AC Nijhuis, Jan G Macville, Merryn VE Kooper, Angelique JA Huijsdens, Karin Hoffer, Mariëtte VJ Go, Attie Creemers, Johan Bhola, Shama L Bilardo, Katia M Suijkerbuijk, Ron Bouman, Katelijne Galjaard, Robert-Jan H Bonsel, Gouke J van Lith, Jan MM |
author_facet | Boormans, Elisabeth MA Birnie, Erwin Wildschut, Hajo I Schuring-Blom, Heleen G Oepkes, Dick van Oppen, Carla AC Nijhuis, Jan G Macville, Merryn VE Kooper, Angelique JA Huijsdens, Karin Hoffer, Mariëtte VJ Go, Attie Creemers, Johan Bhola, Shama L Bilardo, Katia M Suijkerbuijk, Ron Bouman, Katelijne Galjaard, Robert-Jan H Bonsel, Gouke J van Lith, Jan MM |
author_sort | Boormans, Elisabeth MA |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the past 30 years karyotyping was the gold standard for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aberrations in the fetus. Traditional karyotyping (TKT) has a high accuracy and reliability. However, it is labor intensive, the results take 14–21 days, the costs are high and unwanted findings such as abnormalities with unknown clinical relevance are not uncommon. These disadvantages challenged the practice of karyotyping. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) is a new molecular genetic technique in prenatal diagnosis. Previous preclinical evidence suggests equivalence of MLPA and traditional karyotyping (TKT) regarding test performance. METHODS/DESIGN: The proposed study is a multicentre diagnostic substitute study among pregnant women, who choose to have amniocentesis for the indication advanced maternal age and/or increased risk following prenatal screening test. In all subjects, both MLPA and karyotyping will be performed on the amniotic fluid sample. The primary outcome is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes will be maternal quality of life, women's preferences and costs. Analysis will be intention to treat and per protocol analysis. Quality of life analysis will be carried out within the study population. The study aims to include 4500 women. DISCUSSION: The study results are expected to help decide whether MLPA can replace traditional karyotyping for 'low-risk' pregnancies in terms of diagnostic accuracy, quality of life and women's preferences. This will be the first clinical study to report on all relevant aspects of the potential replacement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered in the clinical trial register number ISRCTN47252164 |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2405770 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-24057702008-05-30 Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study Boormans, Elisabeth MA Birnie, Erwin Wildschut, Hajo I Schuring-Blom, Heleen G Oepkes, Dick van Oppen, Carla AC Nijhuis, Jan G Macville, Merryn VE Kooper, Angelique JA Huijsdens, Karin Hoffer, Mariëtte VJ Go, Attie Creemers, Johan Bhola, Shama L Bilardo, Katia M Suijkerbuijk, Ron Bouman, Katelijne Galjaard, Robert-Jan H Bonsel, Gouke J van Lith, Jan MM BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Study Protocol BACKGROUND: In the past 30 years karyotyping was the gold standard for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aberrations in the fetus. Traditional karyotyping (TKT) has a high accuracy and reliability. However, it is labor intensive, the results take 14–21 days, the costs are high and unwanted findings such as abnormalities with unknown clinical relevance are not uncommon. These disadvantages challenged the practice of karyotyping. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) is a new molecular genetic technique in prenatal diagnosis. Previous preclinical evidence suggests equivalence of MLPA and traditional karyotyping (TKT) regarding test performance. METHODS/DESIGN: The proposed study is a multicentre diagnostic substitute study among pregnant women, who choose to have amniocentesis for the indication advanced maternal age and/or increased risk following prenatal screening test. In all subjects, both MLPA and karyotyping will be performed on the amniotic fluid sample. The primary outcome is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes will be maternal quality of life, women's preferences and costs. Analysis will be intention to treat and per protocol analysis. Quality of life analysis will be carried out within the study population. The study aims to include 4500 women. DISCUSSION: The study results are expected to help decide whether MLPA can replace traditional karyotyping for 'low-risk' pregnancies in terms of diagnostic accuracy, quality of life and women's preferences. This will be the first clinical study to report on all relevant aspects of the potential replacement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered in the clinical trial register number ISRCTN47252164 BioMed Central 2008-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC2405770/ /pubmed/18492228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-8-18 Text en Copyright © 2008 Boormans et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Boormans, Elisabeth MA Birnie, Erwin Wildschut, Hajo I Schuring-Blom, Heleen G Oepkes, Dick van Oppen, Carla AC Nijhuis, Jan G Macville, Merryn VE Kooper, Angelique JA Huijsdens, Karin Hoffer, Mariëtte VJ Go, Attie Creemers, Johan Bhola, Shama L Bilardo, Katia M Suijkerbuijk, Ron Bouman, Katelijne Galjaard, Robert-Jan H Bonsel, Gouke J van Lith, Jan MM Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title | Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title_full | Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title_fullStr | Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title_full_unstemmed | Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title_short | Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the M.A.K.E. study |
title_sort | multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification versus karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: the m.a.k.e. study |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2405770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18492228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-8-18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT boormanselisabethma multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT birnieerwin multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT wildschuthajoi multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT schuringblomheleeng multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT oepkesdick multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT vanoppencarlaac multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT nijhuisjang multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT macvillemerrynve multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT kooperangeliqueja multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT huijsdenskarin multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT hoffermariettevj multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT goattie multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT creemersjohan multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT bholashamal multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT bilardokatiam multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT suijkerbuijkron multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT boumankatelijne multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT galjaardrobertjanh multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT bonselgoukej multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy AT vanlithjanmm multiplexligationdependentprobeamplificationversuskaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisthemakestudy |