-
Systematic Reviews Jan 2023Rett syndrome is a rare, severe neurodevelopmental disorder. Almost all cases occur in girls, in association with spontaneous (non-inherited) mutations involving the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rett syndrome is a rare, severe neurodevelopmental disorder. Almost all cases occur in girls, in association with spontaneous (non-inherited) mutations involving the methyl-CpG-binding protein 2 gene located on the X chromosome. Diagnostic criteria for typical Rett syndrome require a period of regression, followed by recovery or stabilization, and fulfillment of all four main criteria (loss of purposeful hand skills, loss of spoken language, gait abnormalities, and stereotypic hand movements). Our objective was to estimate the prevalence of Rett syndrome in the general population, stratified by sex.
METHODS
We conducted a search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and LIVIVO to retrieve studies published in English between Jan. 1, 2000, and June 30, 2021. Pooled prevalence with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated using a random-effects meta-analysis based on a generalized linear mixed model with a logit link.
RESULTS
Ten eligible studies were identified (all in females), with a combined sample size of 9.57 million women and 673 Rett syndrome cases. The pooled prevalence estimate (random effects) was 7.1 per 100,000 females (95% CI: 4.8, 10.5, heterogeneity p < 0.001). Despite greatly variable precision of estimation, all estimates were compatible with a prevalence range of approximately 5 to 10 cases per 100,000 females based on their respective 95% CIs.
CONCLUSION
These findings may facilitate planning of therapeutic trials in this indication in terms of target sample size and accrual times.
Topics: Humans; Female; Rett Syndrome; Methyl-CpG-Binding Protein 2; Prevalence; Mutation
PubMed: 36642718
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02169-6 -
Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal... Jul 2022Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in high-risk populations. This systematic evidence review evaluates NIPS performance in a general-risk population.
METHODS
Medline (PubMed) and Embase were used to identify studies examining detection of Down syndrome (T21), trisomy 18 (T18), trisomy 13 (T13), sex chromosome aneuploidies, rare autosomal trisomies, copy number variants, and maternal conditions, as well as studies assessing the psychological impact of NIPS and the rate of subsequent diagnostic testing. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate pooled estimates of NIPS performance (P < .05). Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed.
RESULTS
A total of 87 studies met inclusion criteria. Diagnostic odds ratios were significant (P < .0001) for T21, T18, and T13 for singleton and twin pregnancies. NIPS was accurate (≥99.78%) in detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies. Performance for rare autosomal trisomies and copy number variants was variable. Use of NIPS reduced diagnostic tests by 31% to 79%. Conclusions regarding psychosocial outcomes could not be drawn owing to lack of data. Identification of maternal conditions was rare.
CONCLUSION
NIPS is a highly accurate screening method for T21, T18, and T13 in both singleton and twin pregnancies.
Topics: Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Down Syndrome; Female; Humans; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis; Sex Chromosome Aberrations; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 35608568
DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.03.019 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2017Common fetal aneuploidies include Down syndrome (trisomy 21 or T21), Edward syndrome (trisomy 18 or T18), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13 or T13), Turner syndrome (45,X),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Common fetal aneuploidies include Down syndrome (trisomy 21 or T21), Edward syndrome (trisomy 18 or T18), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13 or T13), Turner syndrome (45,X), Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY), Triple X syndrome (47,XXX) and 47,XYY syndrome (47,XYY). Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies is standard care in many countries, but current biochemical and ultrasound tests have high false negative and false positive rates. The discovery of fetal circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) in maternal blood offers the potential for genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing (gNIPT) as a more accurate screening method. Two approaches used for gNIPT are massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS) and targeted massively parallel sequencing (TMPS).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of MPSS and TMPS for gNIPT as a first-tier test in unselected populations of pregnant women undergoing aneuploidy screening or as a second-tier test in pregnant women considered to be high risk after first-tier screening for common fetal aneuploidies. The gNIPT results were confirmed by a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or neonatal clinical examination.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched 13 databases (including MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science) from 1 January 2007 to 12 July 2016 without any language, search filter or publication type restrictions. We also screened reference lists of relevant full-text articles, websites of private prenatal diagnosis companies and conference abstracts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies could include pregnant women of any age, ethnicity and gestational age with singleton or multifetal pregnancy. The women must have had a screening test for fetal aneuploidy by MPSS or TMPS and a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or medical records from birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction and quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool). Where possible, hierarchical models or simpler alternatives were used for meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixty-five studies of 86,139 pregnant women (3141 aneuploids and 82,998 euploids) were included. No study was judged to be at low risk of bias across the four domains of the QUADAS-2 tool but applicability concerns were generally low. Of the 65 studies, 42 enrolled pregnant women at high risk, five recruited an unselected population and 18 recruited cohorts with a mix of prior risk of fetal aneuploidy. Among the 65 studies, 44 evaluated MPSS and 21 evaluated TMPS; of these, five studies also compared gNIPT with a traditional screening test (biochemical, ultrasound or both). Forty-six out of 65 studies (71%) reported gNIPT assay failure rate, which ranged between 0% and 25% for MPSS, and between 0.8% and 7.5% for TMPS.In the population of unselected pregnant women, MPSS was evaluated by only one study; the study assessed T21, T18 and T13. TMPS was assessed for T21 in four studies involving unselected cohorts; three of the studies also assessed T18 and 13. In pooled analyses (88 T21 cases, 22 T18 cases, eight T13 cases and 20,649 unaffected pregnancies (non T21, T18 and T13)), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of TMPS was 99.2% (78.2% to 100%), 90.9% (70.0% to 97.7%) and 65.1% (9.16% to 97.2%) for T21, T18 and T13, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificity was above 99.9% for T21, T18 and T13.In high-risk populations, MPSS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in 30, 28, 20 and 12 studies, respectively. In pooled analyses (1048 T21 cases, 332 T18 cases, 128 T13 cases and 15,797 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of MPSS was 99.7% (98.0% to 100%), 97.8% (92.5% to 99.4%), 95.8% (86.1% to 98.9%) and 91.7% (78.3% to 97.1%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificities (95% CI) were 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.8% (99.8% to 99.9%) and 99.6% (98.9% to 99.8%). In this risk group, TMPS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in six, five, two and four studies. In pooled analyses (246 T21 cases, 112 T18 cases, 20 T13 cases and 4282 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% CI) of TMPS was 99.2% (96.8% to 99.8%), 98.2% (93.1% to 99.6%), 100% (83.9% to 100%) and 92.4% (84.1% to 96.5%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X respectively. The clinical specificities were above 100% for T21, T18 and T13 and 99.8% (98.3% to 100%) for 45,X. Indirect comparisons of MPSS and TMPS for T21, T18 and 45,X showed no statistical difference in clinical sensitivity, clinical specificity or both. Due to limited data, comparative meta-analysis of MPSS and TMPS was not possible for T13.We were unable to perform meta-analyses of gNIPT for 47,XXX, 47,XXY and 47,XYY because there were very few or no studies in one or more risk groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
These results show that MPSS and TMPS perform similarly in terms of clinical sensitivity and specificity for the detection of fetal T31, T18, T13 and sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA). However, no study compared the two approaches head-to-head in the same cohort of patients. The accuracy of gNIPT as a prenatal screening test has been mainly evaluated as a second-tier screening test to identify pregnancies at very low risk of fetal aneuploidies (T21, T18 and T13), thus avoiding invasive procedures. Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing methods appear to be sensitive and highly specific for detection of fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in high-risk populations. There is paucity of data on the accuracy of gNIPT as a first-tier aneuploidy screening test in a population of unselected pregnant women. With respect to the replacement of invasive tests, the performance of gNIPT observed in this review is not sufficient to replace current invasive diagnostic tests.We conclude that given the current data on the performance of gNIPT, invasive fetal karyotyping is still the required diagnostic approach to confirm the presence of a chromosomal abnormality prior to making irreversible decisions relative to the pregnancy outcome. However, most of the gNIPT studies were prone to bias, especially in terms of the selection of participants.
Topics: Aneuploidy; Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Chromosome Disorders; Disorders of Sex Development; Female; Fetal Diseases; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, High-Risk; Prenatal Diagnosis
PubMed: 29125628
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011767.pub2 -
JAMA Aug 2011Noninvasive prenatal determination of fetal sex using cell-free fetal DNA provides an alternative to invasive techniques for some heritable disorders. In some countries... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Noninvasive prenatal determination of fetal sex using cell-free fetal DNA provides an alternative to invasive techniques for some heritable disorders. In some countries this testing has transitioned to clinical care, despite the absence of a formal assessment of performance.
OBJECTIVE
To document overall test performance of noninvasive fetal sex determination using cell-free fetal DNA and to identify variables that affect performance.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic review and meta-analysis with search of PubMed (January 1, 1997-April 17, 2011) to identify English-language human studies reporting primary data. References from review articles were also searched.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Abstracts were read independently to identify studies reporting primary data suitable for analysis. Covariates included publication year, sample type, DNA amplification methodology, Y chromosome sequence, and gestational age. Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers.
RESULTS
From 57 selected studies, 80 data sets (representing 3524 male-bearing pregnancies and 3017 female-bearing pregnancies) were analyzed. Overall performance of the test to detect Y chromosome sequences had the following characteristics: sensitivity, 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.7%-96.1%) and specificity, 98.6% (95% CI, 98.1%-99.0%); diagnostic odds ratio (OR), 885; positive predictive value, 98.8%; negative predictive value, 94.8%; area under curve (AUC), 0.993 (95% CI, 0.989-0.995), with significant interstudy heterogeneity. DNA methodology and gestational age had the largest effects on test performance. Methodology test characteristics were AUC, 0.988 (95% CI, 0.979-0.993) for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and AUC, 0.996 (95% CI, 0.993-0.998) for real-time quantitative PCR (RTQ-PCR) (P = .02). Gestational age test characteristics were AUC, 0.989 (95% CI, 0.965-0.998) (<7 weeks); AUC, 0.994 (95% CI, 0.987-0.997) (7-12 weeks); AUC, 0.992 (95% CI, 0.983-0.996) (13-20 weeks); and AUC, 0.998 (95% CI, 0.990-0.999) (>20 weeks) (P = .02 for comparison of diagnostic ORs across age ranges). RTQ-PCR (sensitivity, 96.0%; specificity, 99.0%) outperformed conventional PCR (sensitivity, 94.0%; specificity, 97.3%). Testing after 20 weeks (sensitivity, 99.0%; specificity, 99.6%) outperformed testing prior to 7 weeks (sensitivity, 74.5%; specificity, 99.1%), testing at 7 through 12 weeks (sensitivity, 94.8%; specificity, 98.9%), and 13 through 20 weeks (sensitivity, 95.5%; specificity, 99.1%).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite interstudy variability, performance was high using maternal blood. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of Y chromosome sequences was greatest using RTQ-PCR after 20 weeks' gestation. Tests using urine and tests performed before 7 weeks' gestation were unreliable.
Topics: Chromosomes, Human, Y; DNA; Female; Fetus; Humans; Male; Polymerase Chain Reaction; Predictive Value of Tests; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sequence Analysis, DNA; Sex Determination Analysis
PubMed: 21828326
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.1114 -
Prenatal Diagnosis Feb 2023The aim was to determine the accuracy of cell-free DNA testing (cfDNA) for detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) in singleton pregnancies. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim was to determine the accuracy of cell-free DNA testing (cfDNA) for detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) in singleton pregnancies.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess cfDNA accuracy for prenatal detection of 45,X, 47,XXY, 47,XXX and 47,XYY. Inclusion was restricted to studies published between January 2010 and December 2021 reporting both cfDNA and confirmatory diagnostic test results.
RESULTS
For 45,X, the sensitivity was 98.8% (95%CI 94.6%-100%), specificity 99.4% (95%CI 98.7%-99.9%) and positive predictive value (PPV) 14.5% (95%CI 7.0%-43.8%). For 47,XXY, the sensitivity was 100% (95%CI 99.6%-100%), specificity 100% (95%CI 99.9%-100%) and PPV 97.7% (95%CI 78.6%-100%). For 47,XXX, the sensitivity was 100% (95%CI 96.9%-100%), specificity 99.9% (95%CI 99.7%-100%) and PPV 61.6% (95%CI 37.6%-95.4%). For 47,XYY, the sensitivity was 100% (95%CI 91.3%-100%), specificity 100% (95% CI 100%-100%) and PPV 100% (95%CI 76.5%-100%). All four SCAs had estimated negative predictive values (NPV) exceeding 99.99%, though false negatives were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis suggests that cfDNA is a reliable screening test for SCA, though both false negatives and false positives were reported. These estimates of test performance are derived from pregnancies at high pretest risk for aneuploidy, limiting the generalisability to average risk pregnancies.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Sex Chromosome Aberrations; Aneuploidy; Chromosomes, Human, X; Prenatal Diagnosis
PubMed: 36588186
DOI: 10.1002/pd.6298 -
Human Reproduction Update Dec 2021Human male infertility has a notable genetic component, including well-established diagnoses such as Klinefelter syndrome, Y-chromosome microdeletions and monogenic...
BACKGROUND
Human male infertility has a notable genetic component, including well-established diagnoses such as Klinefelter syndrome, Y-chromosome microdeletions and monogenic causes. Approximately 4% of all infertile men are now diagnosed with a genetic cause, but a majority (60-70%) remain without a clear diagnosis and are classified as unexplained. This is likely in large part due to a delay in the field adopting next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, and the absence of clear statements from field leaders as to what constitutes a validated cause of human male infertility (the current paper aims to address this). Fortunately, there has been a significant increase in the number of male infertility NGS studies. These have revealed a considerable number of novel gene-disease relationships (GDRs), which each require stringent assessment to validate the strength of genotype-phenotype associations. To definitively assess which of these GDRs are clinically relevant, the International Male Infertility Genomics Consortium (IMIGC) has identified the need for a systematic review and a comprehensive overview of known male infertility genes and an assessment of the evidence for reported GDRs.
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
In 2019, the first standardised clinical validity assessment of monogenic causes of male infertility was published. Here, we provide a comprehensive update of the subsequent 1.5 years, employing the joint expertise of the IMIGC to systematically evaluate all available evidence (as of 1 July 2020) for monogenic causes of isolated or syndromic male infertility, endocrine disorders or reproductive system abnormalities affecting the male sex organs. In addition, we systematically assessed the evidence for all previously reported possible monogenic causes of male infertility, using a framework designed for a more appropriate clinical interpretation of disease genes.
SEARCH METHODS
We performed a literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines up until 1 July 2020 for publications in English, using search terms related to 'male infertility' in combination with the word 'genetics' in PubMed. Next, the quality and the extent of all evidence supporting selected genes were assessed using an established and standardised scoring method. We assessed the experimental quality, patient phenotype assessment and functional evidence based on gene expression, mutant in-vitro cell and in-vivo animal model phenotypes. A final score was used to determine the clinical validity of each GDR, across the following five categories: no evidence, limited, moderate, strong or definitive. Variants were also reclassified according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics-Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines and were recorded in spreadsheets for each GDR, which are available at imigc.org.
OUTCOMES
The primary outcome of this review was an overview of all known GDRs for monogenic causes of human male infertility and their clinical validity. We identified a total of 120 genes that were moderately, strongly or definitively linked to 104 infertility phenotypes.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
Our systematic review curates all currently available evidence to reveal the strength of GDRs in male infertility. The existing guidelines for genetic testing in male infertility cases are based on studies published 25 years ago, and an update is far overdue. The identification of 104 high-probability 'human male infertility genes' is a 33% increase from the number identified in 2019. The insights generated in the current review will provide the impetus for an update of existing guidelines, will inform novel evidence-based genetic testing strategies used in clinics, and will identify gaps in our knowledge of male infertility genetics. We discuss the relevant international guidelines regarding research related to gene discovery and provide specific recommendations to the field of male infertility. Based on our findings, the IMIGC consortium recommend several updates to the genetic testing standards currently employed in the field of human male infertility, most important being the adoption of exome sequencing, or at least sequencing of the genes validated in this study, and expanding the patient groups for which genetic testing is recommended.
Topics: Animals; Chromosome Deletion; Genetic Testing; Genomics; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Infertility, Male; Male
PubMed: 34498060
DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmab030 -
Children (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2022: Sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) are a group of disorders characterised by an abnormal number of sex chromosomes. Collective prevalence rate of SCAs is estimated to... (Review)
Review
: Sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) are a group of disorders characterised by an abnormal number of sex chromosomes. Collective prevalence rate of SCAs is estimated to be around 1 in 400-500 live births; sex chromosome trisomies (e.g., XXX, XXY, XYY) are most frequent, while tetra- and pentasomies (e.g., XXXX, XXXXX, XXXY, XXXXY) are rarer, and the most common is 48, XXYY syndrome. The presence of additional X and/or Y chromosomes is believed to cause neurodevelopmental differences, with increased risk for developmental delays, language-based learning disabilities, cognitive impairments, executive dysfunction, and behavioural and psychological disorders. : Our review has the purpose of analysing the neurocognitive, linguistical and behavioural profile of patients affected by sex chromosomes supernumerary aneuploidies (tetrasomy and pentasomy) to better understand the specific areas of weakness, in order to provide specific rehabilitation therapy. : The literature search was performed by two authors independently. We used MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsycINFO search engines to identify sources of interest, without year or language restrictions. At the end of an accurate selection, 16 articles fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. : International literature has described single aspects of the neuropsychological profile of 48, XXYY and 49, XXXXY patients. In 48, XXYY patients, various degrees of psychosocial/executive functioning issues have been reported and there is an increased frequency of behavioural problems in childhood. Developmental delay and behavioural problems are the most common presenting problems, even if anxiety, depression and oppositional defiant disorder are also reported. They also show generalized difficulties with socialization and communication. Cognitive abilities are lower in measures of verbal IQ than in measures of performance IQ. Visuospatial skills are a relative strength compared to verbal skills. In patients with 49, XXXXY, both intellectual and adaptive functioning skills fall into the disability range, with better non-verbal cognitive performance. Speech and language testing reveals more deficits in expressive language than receptive language and comprehension. Anxiety, thought problems, internalizing and externalizing problems, and deficits in social cognition and communication are reported. Behavioural symptoms lessen from school age to adolescence, with the exception of thought problems and anxiety. Individuals affected by sex chromosome aneuploidies show testosterone deficiency, microorchidism, lack of pubertal progression and infertility. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is usually recommended for these patients: different studies have found that testosterone-based HRT benefit a wide range of areas initiated in these disorders, affecting not only neuromotor, cognitive and behavioural profile but also structural anomalies of the brain (i.e., increase of volume of grey temporal lobe matter). In conclusion, further studies are needed to better understand the neuropsychological profile with a complete evaluation, including neurocognitive and psychosocial aspects and to establish the real impact of HRT on improving the cognitive and behavioural profile of these patients.
PubMed: 36360447
DOI: 10.3390/children9111719 -
Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine May 2021There is little evidence on the performance of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for the detection of fetal sex chromosomal imbalances. In this review, we aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is little evidence on the performance of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for the detection of fetal sex chromosomal imbalances. In this review, we aimed to appraise and synthesize the literature on the performance of NIPT for the prenatal detection of fetal sex chromosome aneuploidies.
METHODS
We performed our literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CADTH. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently. There were no restrictions on the study population. Meta-analyses were performed with "R" software. Pooled sensitivities and specificities with their 95% CI were estimated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed by a Q test.
RESULTS
Based on 11 studies in high prior risk pregnancies, including 116 affected fetuses in aggregate, Massively Parallel Shotgun Sequencing (MPSS) had a sensitivity of 93.9% (95% CI 84.1%, 97.8%) and a specificity of 99.6% (95% CI 98.7%, 99.9%) for the detection of 45,X. Based on four studies in high-risk pregnancies, with 83 affected fetuses in aggregate, Targeted Massively Parallel Sequencing (TMPS) had a sensitivity of 83.2% (95% CI 49.6%, 96.2%) and specificity was 99.8% (95% CI 98.3%, 100%) for the detection of 45,X. In mixed-risk pregnancies, the sensitivity of TMPS for the detection of 45,X was 90.9% (2 studies; 95% CI 70%, 97.7%) and specificity 99.9% (2 studies; 95% CI 99.4%, 100%); MPSS data were not available in such pregnancies. Based on smaller numbers of studies, and small numbers of affected fetuses in either high-risk or mixed-risk pregnancies (using either MPSS or TMPS), the sensitivities and specificities were equal to or greater than 76.2% for 47,XXX, 47,XXY and 47, XYY. The test failures for SCAs were 0.2% (95% CI 0%, 13.6%) for MPSS and 5.6% (95% CI 3.7%, 8.4%) for TMPS.
CONCLUSION
High-quality studies are still desirable in order to estimate the performance of NIPT for the detection of sex chromosome imbalances.
Topics: Aneuploidy; Chromosomes, Human, X; Chromosomes, Human, Y; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Female; Humans; Male; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Pregnancy; Sequence Analysis, DNA; Sex Chromosome Disorders of Sex Development
PubMed: 33755350
DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.1654 -
Health Psychology Open 2021This review examines the factors that affect the decision-making process of parental couples evaluating prenatal screening and diagnostic tests. A systematic search was... (Review)
Review
This review examines the factors that affect the decision-making process of parental couples evaluating prenatal screening and diagnostic tests. A systematic search was performed using PubMed and PsycInfo databases. The 46 included studies had to: investigate the decision-making process about prenatal testing; focus on tests detecting trisomy 21, 18, 13, and abnormalities of sex chromosomes; be published in English peer-reviewed journals. The decision-making process seems composed of different levels: an individual level with demographic, clinical, and psychological aspects; a contextual level related to the technical features of the test and the information received; a relational level involving family and society.
PubMed: 33489303
DOI: 10.1177/2055102920987455 -
Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine Jul 2020Follow-up cytogenetic analysis has been recommended for cases with positive noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) results. This study of five cases with numerical and... (Review)
Review
Diagnostic cytogenetic testing following positive noninvasive prenatal screening results of sex chromosome abnormalities: Report of five cases and systematic review of evidence.
BACKGROUND
Follow-up cytogenetic analysis has been recommended for cases with positive noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) results. This study of five cases with numerical and structural sex chromosomal abnormalities (SCA) and a review of large case series of NIPS provided guidance to improve prenatal diagnosis for SCA.
METHODS
Following positive NIPS results for SCA, karyotype analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and locus-specific quantitative PCR were performed on cultured amniocytes, chorionic villi cells, and stimulated lymphocytes. Review of large case series was performed to evaluate the NIPS positive rate, follow-up rate of cytogenetic analysis, positive predictive value (PPV) for major types of SCA, and relative frequencies of subtypes of major SCA.
RESULTS
Of the five cases with positive NIPS for SCA, case 1 showed a mosaic pattern of monosomy X and isodicentric Y; case 2 showed a mosaic pattern of monosomy X confined to the placenta; cases 3 and 4 had an isochromosome of Xq, and case 5 showed a derivative chromosome 14 from a Yq/14p translocation of maternal origin. Review of literature showed that mean positive rate of NIPS for SCA was 0.61%, follow-up rate of cytogenetics analysis was 76%, and mean PPV for SCA was 48%. Mosaic patterns and structural rearrangements involving sex chromosomes were estimated in 3%-20% and 3% of SCA cases, respectively.
CONCLUSION
These five cases further demonstrated the necessity to pursue follow-up cytogenetic analysis to characterize mosaic patterns and structural abnormalities involving sex chromosomes and their value for prenatal genetic counseling. A workflow showing the performance of current NIPS and cytogenetic analysis for SCA was summarized. These results could facilitate an evidence-based approach to guide prenatal diagnosis of SCA.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; Karyotyping; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sex Chromosome Aberrations; Sex Chromosome Disorders
PubMed: 32383339
DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.1297