Cargando…

Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study

BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) remains nowadays a valid alternative for couples at high-risk of having a child with a genetic disease and for women older than 37–40 years with the high risk of chromosomal aneuploidies in the embryos. However the use of PGD for high penetrance re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Michalska, Danuta, Jaguszewska, Kinga, Liss, Joanna, Kitowska, Kamila, Mirecka, Agata, Łukaszuk, Krzysztof
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23941236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1897-4287-11-10
_version_ 1782281680635035648
author Michalska, Danuta
Jaguszewska, Kinga
Liss, Joanna
Kitowska, Kamila
Mirecka, Agata
Łukaszuk, Krzysztof
author_facet Michalska, Danuta
Jaguszewska, Kinga
Liss, Joanna
Kitowska, Kamila
Mirecka, Agata
Łukaszuk, Krzysztof
author_sort Michalska, Danuta
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) remains nowadays a valid alternative for couples at high-risk of having a child with a genetic disease and for women older than 37–40 years with the high risk of chromosomal aneuploidies in the embryos. However the use of PGD for high penetrance recessive, dominant and X-liked disorders occurring in early life is documented, debate exists regarding its appropriateness in lower penetrance and late-onset cancer susceptibility syndromes. The data regarding the efficacy of different molecular techniques used in PGD are still lacking. We therefore sought to assess the different molecular techniques used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G. METHODS: Anonymous donors of the oocytes and control healthy blood samples were extracted and analyzed in the Fertility and Reproductive Center Invicta in Gdansk. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for the most frequent mutations: 185delAG, 5382insC, C61G in BRCA 1 gene was carried out on single, unfertilized oocytes, in metaphase of second meiotic division, not qualified to IVF. Positive mutation controls were represented by cell lines from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research: GM14090 (185delAG), GM14097 (C61G), GM13715 (5382insC). RESULTS: Repeatability of the results acquired from the WGA analysis for the mutation 5382insC was 38%. The repeatability of the nested-PCR analysis in the second round of the amplification was labile for the mutation 5382insC and 185delAG and was ranged from 47% to 57%. However, the repeatability for the mutation C61G was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the nested-PCR technique remains more sensitive and specific method as compared to WGA. WGA performed on the single cells did not reflect expected results. The repeatability of the WGA methodology remains questionable, and any analysis attempt does not guarantee reliable results. Further evaluation is strongly needed to propose the most accurate molecular technique used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3751838
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37518382013-08-24 Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study Michalska, Danuta Jaguszewska, Kinga Liss, Joanna Kitowska, Kamila Mirecka, Agata Łukaszuk, Krzysztof Hered Cancer Clin Pract Research BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) remains nowadays a valid alternative for couples at high-risk of having a child with a genetic disease and for women older than 37–40 years with the high risk of chromosomal aneuploidies in the embryos. However the use of PGD for high penetrance recessive, dominant and X-liked disorders occurring in early life is documented, debate exists regarding its appropriateness in lower penetrance and late-onset cancer susceptibility syndromes. The data regarding the efficacy of different molecular techniques used in PGD are still lacking. We therefore sought to assess the different molecular techniques used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G. METHODS: Anonymous donors of the oocytes and control healthy blood samples were extracted and analyzed in the Fertility and Reproductive Center Invicta in Gdansk. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for the most frequent mutations: 185delAG, 5382insC, C61G in BRCA 1 gene was carried out on single, unfertilized oocytes, in metaphase of second meiotic division, not qualified to IVF. Positive mutation controls were represented by cell lines from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research: GM14090 (185delAG), GM14097 (C61G), GM13715 (5382insC). RESULTS: Repeatability of the results acquired from the WGA analysis for the mutation 5382insC was 38%. The repeatability of the nested-PCR analysis in the second round of the amplification was labile for the mutation 5382insC and 185delAG and was ranged from 47% to 57%. However, the repeatability for the mutation C61G was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the nested-PCR technique remains more sensitive and specific method as compared to WGA. WGA performed on the single cells did not reflect expected results. The repeatability of the WGA methodology remains questionable, and any analysis attempt does not guarantee reliable results. Further evaluation is strongly needed to propose the most accurate molecular technique used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G. BioMed Central 2013-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3751838/ /pubmed/23941236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1897-4287-11-10 Text en Copyright © 2013 Michalska 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 Research
Michalska, Danuta
Jaguszewska, Kinga
Liss, Joanna
Kitowska, Kamila
Mirecka, Agata
Łukaszuk, Krzysztof
Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title_full Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title_fullStr Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title_short Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
title_sort comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-pcr methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for brca1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes–a pilot study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23941236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1897-4287-11-10
work_keys_str_mv AT michalskadanuta comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy
AT jaguszewskakinga comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy
AT lissjoanna comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy
AT kitowskakamila comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy
AT mireckaagata comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy
AT łukaszukkrzysztof comparisonofwholegenomeamplificationandnestedpcrmethodsforpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisforbrca1genemutationonunfertilizedoocytesapilotstudy