Cargando…

Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis

AIM: Families with an adverse history of monogenic disease focus on single‐gene diagnosis instead of low‐depth whole‐genome sequence, during subsequent pregnancies. The aim of this study was to assess the potential usefulness of low‐depth whole‐genome sequencing (copy number variant sequencing [CNV‐...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Panlai, Xia, Yanjie, Li, Qianqian, Kong, Xiangdong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33474820
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14627
_version_ 1783668443878260736
author Shi, Panlai
Xia, Yanjie
Li, Qianqian
Kong, Xiangdong
author_facet Shi, Panlai
Xia, Yanjie
Li, Qianqian
Kong, Xiangdong
author_sort Shi, Panlai
collection PubMed
description AIM: Families with an adverse history of monogenic disease focus on single‐gene diagnosis instead of low‐depth whole‐genome sequence, during subsequent pregnancies. The aim of this study was to assess the potential usefulness of low‐depth whole‐genome sequencing (copy number variant sequencing [CNV‐seq]) detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis. METHODS: A total of 285 families with a history of monogenic disease (of 41 different types; eliminated during the current pregnancy) were recruited and retrospectively analyzed. Low‐depth whole‐genome sequencing (CNV‐Seq, Next‐Seq CN500 platform) was performed for all fetuses. RESULTS: The CNV detection results of the 285 samples were as follows: one case of 18‐trisomy chimera (0.35%), one case of pathogenic 3q29 microdeletion syndrome CNV (0.35%), four cases of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) CNVs (1.40%), and four cases of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) carriers (1.40%); and the remaining samples were normal (96.15%). Of note, 2/285 (0.70%) samples still exhibited pathogenic abnormalities. All positive samples were followed up where the two cases of pathogenic abnormalities elected the pregnancy termination, while the four VUS cases and four DMD‐carrier cases were born healthy. CONCLUSION: In cases where prenatal fetal monogenic disease has been ruled out, CNV detection is still beneficial and should be performed to prevent missed pathogenic CNVs. However, the costs need to be balanced against benefits, and the research will need to assess other types of testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7986431
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79864312021-03-25 Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis Shi, Panlai Xia, Yanjie Li, Qianqian Kong, Xiangdong J Obstet Gynaecol Res Original Articles AIM: Families with an adverse history of monogenic disease focus on single‐gene diagnosis instead of low‐depth whole‐genome sequence, during subsequent pregnancies. The aim of this study was to assess the potential usefulness of low‐depth whole‐genome sequencing (copy number variant sequencing [CNV‐seq]) detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis. METHODS: A total of 285 families with a history of monogenic disease (of 41 different types; eliminated during the current pregnancy) were recruited and retrospectively analyzed. Low‐depth whole‐genome sequencing (CNV‐Seq, Next‐Seq CN500 platform) was performed for all fetuses. RESULTS: The CNV detection results of the 285 samples were as follows: one case of 18‐trisomy chimera (0.35%), one case of pathogenic 3q29 microdeletion syndrome CNV (0.35%), four cases of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) CNVs (1.40%), and four cases of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) carriers (1.40%); and the remaining samples were normal (96.15%). Of note, 2/285 (0.70%) samples still exhibited pathogenic abnormalities. All positive samples were followed up where the two cases of pathogenic abnormalities elected the pregnancy termination, while the four VUS cases and four DMD‐carrier cases were born healthy. CONCLUSION: In cases where prenatal fetal monogenic disease has been ruled out, CNV detection is still beneficial and should be performed to prevent missed pathogenic CNVs. However, the costs need to be balanced against benefits, and the research will need to assess other types of testing. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021-01-20 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7986431/ /pubmed/33474820 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14627 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Shi, Panlai
Xia, Yanjie
Li, Qianqian
Kong, Xiangdong
Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title_full Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title_fullStr Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title_full_unstemmed Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title_short Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
title_sort usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33474820
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14627
work_keys_str_mv AT shipanlai usefulnessofcopynumbervariantdetectionfollowingmonogenicdiseaseexclusioninprenataldiagnosis
AT xiayanjie usefulnessofcopynumbervariantdetectionfollowingmonogenicdiseaseexclusioninprenataldiagnosis
AT liqianqian usefulnessofcopynumbervariantdetectionfollowingmonogenicdiseaseexclusioninprenataldiagnosis
AT kongxiangdong usefulnessofcopynumbervariantdetectionfollowingmonogenicdiseaseexclusioninprenataldiagnosis