scholarly journals Prenatal Diagnosis of Central Nervous System Anomalies by High-Resolution Chromosomal Microarray Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lijuan Sun ◽  
Qingqing Wu ◽  
Shi-Wen Jiang ◽  
Yani Yan ◽  
Xin Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Microarray Analysis ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pathogenic Cnvs ◽  
Cns Malformations ◽  
Cns Anomalies

The aims of this study were to evaluate the contribution of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in the prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with central nervous system (CNS) anomalies but normal chromosomal karyotype. A total of 46 fetuses with CNS anomalies with or without other ultrasound anomalies but normal karyotypes were evaluated by array-based comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH) or single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array. The result showed that CNVs were detected in 17 (37.0%) fetuses. Of these, CNVs identified in 5 (5/46, 10.9%) fetuses were considered to be likely pathogenic, and CNVs detected in 3 (3/46, 6.5%) fetuses were defined as being of uncertain clinical significance. Fetuses with CNS malformations plus other ultrasound anomalies had a higher rate of pathogenic CNVs than those with isolated CNS anomalies (13.6% versus 8.3%), but there was no significant difference (Fisher’s exact test,P>0.05). Pathogenic CNVs were detected most frequently in fetuses with Dandy-Walker syndrome (2/6, 33.3%) when compared with other types of neural malformations, and holoprosencephaly (2/7, 28.6%) ranked the second. CMA is valuable in prenatal genetic diagnosis of fetuses with CNS anomalies. It should be considered as part of prenatal diagnosis in fetuses with CNS malformations and normal karyotypes.

scholarly journals The use of chromosomal microarray analysis for diagnostics of chromosomal pathology in fetal central nervous system malformations

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 449-456
Author(s):  
J. K. Kievskaya ◽  
I. V. Kanivets ◽  
E. V. Kudryavtseva ◽  
D. V. Pyankov ◽  
S. A. Korostelev
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Microarray Analysis ◽  
Congenital Malformations ◽  
Copy Number Variations ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis ◽  
Chromosome Microarray Analysis ◽  
Pathogenic Cnvs ◽  
Chromosome Microarray

Introduction. The prevalence of congenital malformations (CMFs) in fetal central nervous system (CNS) ranges from 1.5 to 3 % and covers around 29 % among all malformations, whereas percentage in the structure of perinatal and infant mortality reaches 25–26 %.Aim: to estimate frequency of pathogenic copy number variations (CNVs) in fetuses with congenital malformations of CNS and normal karyotyping cytogenetic analysis.Materials and Methods. There were enrolled 42 pregnant women underwent invasive prenatal diagnostics in 2013–2019 due to ultrasound detection of congenital CNS defect in fetus. Fetal samples were studied by using chromosome microarray analysis (CMA).Results. Various pathogenic CNVs were detected in 7 (16.6 %) fetuses with prenatally diagnosed congenital CNS malformations. Non-syndrome pathogenic CNVs were detected in 85.7 %.Conclusion. Thus, performing chromosome microarray analysis as the first-line assay allows to diagnose not only aneuploidy, but also microdeletion/microduplication, the size of which below resolution threshold for standard cytogenetic karyotyping

scholarly journals Application of chromosome microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingjing Xia ◽  
Xinhong Yang ◽  
Jing Fu ◽  
Zhenjuan Teng ◽  
Yan Lv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Microarray Analysis ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Karyotype Analysis ◽  
Copy Number Variations ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis ◽  
Genetic Abnormalities ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chromosomal Karyotype

Abstract Background To explore the application value of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in prenatal diagnosis. Methods The results of chromosome karyotype analysis and CMA of 477 cases undergoing amniocentesis were analyzed. The results of the no ultrasound abnormality group and the ultrasound abnormality group were compared separately. Within the ultrasound abnormality group, the results of the ultrasound structural malformation group, the ultrasound soft index abnormality group, and other ultrasound abnormality (including abnormal amniotic fluid volume and fetal growth restriction) groups were compared. Results Abnormal chromosome and CMA results were found in a total of 71 cases (15.88%, 71/447), which can be broken down into a total of 23 karyotype abnormalities (5.15%, 23/447), consisting of 18 cases of aneuploidy (4.03%, 18/447), 2 cases of unbalanced chromosome rearrangements (0.44%, 2/447), and 3 cases of chimerism (0.67%, 3/447); 17 cases with detection of pathogenic copy number variations (pCNVs) (3.80%, 17/447); and 31 cases of detection of clinical variants of unknown significance (VOUS) (6.93%, 31/447). CMA detected 3.8% more genetic abnormalities than karyotype analysis (in addition to the abnormalities detected simultaneously by karyotype analysis). Between the no ultrasound abnormality group and the ultrasound abnormality group, there was an extremely significant difference in the detection rate of an abnormal chromosomal karyotype (P < 0.01) and of VOUS (P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference in the detection rate of pCNV (P > 0.05). Comparing the ultrasound structural malformation group, the ultrasound soft index abnormality group, and the other ultrasound abnormality group, there were no significant differences in the detection rate of abnormal chromosomal karyotypes (P > 0.05), pCNV (P > 0.05) or VOUS (P > 0.05). Conclusions The detection rate of chromosomal karyotype abnormalities in prenatal diagnosis in cases with no ultrasound abnormalities was higher. For cases with fetal ultrasound structural abnormalities, when compared with traditional karyotype analysis, CMA can improve the detection rate of fetal genetic abnormalities. However, the no ultrasound abnormality group also had a high VOUS abnormality detection rate, so it is necessary to strictly define the CMA indications.

scholarly journals Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling in central nervous system tumors of children and young adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianling Ji ◽  
Kristiyana Kaneva ◽  
Matthew C Hiemenz ◽  
Girish Dhall ◽  
Tom Belle Davidson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Adolescent And Young Adult ◽  
Cns Tumors ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis ◽  
Genomic Profiling ◽  
Comprehensive Genomic Profiling ◽  
Clinically Significant

Abstract Background Recent large-scale genomic studies have revealed a spectrum of genetic variants associated with specific subtypes of central nervous system (CNS) tumors. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling of pediatric, adolescent and young adult (AYA) CNS tumors in a prospective setting, including detection of DNA sequence variants, gene fusions, copy number alterations (CNAs), and loss of heterozygosity. Methods OncoKids, a comprehensive DNA- and RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel, in conjunction with chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) was employed to detect diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic markers. NGS was performed on 222 specimens from 212 patients. Clinical CMA data were analyzed in parallel for 66% (146/222) of cases. Results NGS demonstrated clinically significant alterations in 66% (147/222) of cases. Diagnostic markers were identified in 62% (138/222) of cases. Prognostic information and targetable genomic alterations were identified in 22% (49/222) and 18% (41/222) of cases, respectively. Diagnostic or prognostic CNAs were revealed by CMA in 69% (101/146) of cases. Importantly, clinically significant CNAs were detected in 57% (34/60) of cases with noncontributory NGS results. Germline cancer predisposition testing was indicated for 27% (57/212) of patients. Follow-up germline testing was performed for 20 patients which confirmed a germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant in 9 cases: TP53 (2), NF1 (2), SMARCB1 (1), NF2 (1), MSH6 (1), PMS2 (1), and a patient with 47,XXY Klinefelter syndrome. Conclusions Our results demonstrate the significant clinical utility of integrating genomic profiling into routine clinical testing for pediatric and AYA patients with CNS tumors.

Chromosomal Microarray Analysis and Prenatal Diagnosis

2014 ◽  
Vol 69 (10) ◽  
pp. 613-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie O. Lo ◽  
Brian L. Shaffer ◽  
Cori D. Feist ◽  
Aaron B. Caughey
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Microarray Analysis ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray ◽  
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document