Identification of copy number variations among fetuses with ultrasound soft markers using next-generation sequencing

被引:0
作者
Jing Wang
Lin Chen
Cong Zhou
Li Wang
Hanbing Xie
Yuanyuan Xiao
Daishu Yin
Yang Zeng
Feng Tang
Yunyuan Yang
Hongmei Zhu
Xinlian Chen
Qian Zhu
Zhiying Liu
Hongqian Liu
机构
[1] West China Second University Hospital,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
[2] Sichuan University,Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children
[3] Ministry of Education,undefined
[4] Sichuan University,undefined
来源
Scientific Reports | / 8卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A prospective analysis investigating the associations between pathogenic copy number variations (pCNVs) and ultrasound soft markers (USMs) in fetuses and evaluating the clinical value of copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq) in such pregnancy studies was carried out. 3,398 unrelated Chinese women with singleton pregnancies and undergone amniocentesis at 18–36 weeks of gestation for fetal CNV-seq were included. According to the prenatal fetal ultrasound screening results, the samples were divided into 3 groups: normal ultrasound (n = 2616), solitary USM (n = 663), and two or more USMs (n = 119). CNV-seq was performed successfully using all samples. The prevalence of pCNVs in fetuses with normal ultrasound and USMs was 3.03% (79/2616) and 2.94% (23/782), respectively. The risk of segmental aneuploidies was significantly higher in the two or more USMs group (5/119, 4.20%) than in the normal ultrasound (27/2616, 1.04%) or solitary USM (9/663, 1.36%) groups (p = 0.002 and p = 0.031, respectively). Assuming that the resolution of karyotyping is ~5 Mb, a cytogenetic analysis would miss 33 of 102 (32.35%) pCNVs in these samples. Our results suggest an association between pCNVs and fetal USMs; multiple USMs indicate an increased risk of fetal segmental aneuploidies. In prenatal diagnostic testing, CNV-Seq identified additional, clinically significant cytogenetic information.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]  
Benacerraf BR(1985)A sonographic sign for the detection in the second trimester of the fetus with Down’s syndrome Am J Obstet Gynecol 151 1078-1079
[2]  
Barss VA(2001)Sonographic markers of fetal trisomies: second trimester Ultrasound Med 20 655-674
[3]  
Laboda LA(1990)Fetal pyelectasis: a possible association with Down syndrome Obstet Gynecol 76 58-60
[4]  
Nyberg DA(2005)Outcome of fetal renal pelvic dilatation diagnosed during the third trimester Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 25 483-488
[5]  
Souter VLJ(2013)Follow-up of sonographically detected soft markers for fetal aneuploidy Semin Perinatol 37 365-369
[6]  
Benacerraf BR(2005)Sonographic features of chromosomal defects in the second trimester of pregnancy Ginekol Pol 76 528-535
[7]  
Wollenberg A(2006)Global variation in copy number in the human genome Nature 444 444-454
[8]  
Neuhaus TJ(2007)Copy-number variation and association studies of human diseases Nature Genetics 39 37-42
[9]  
Willi UV(2017)Copy Number Variations with Isolated Fetal Ventriculomegaly Curr Mol Med 17 133-139
[10]  
Wisser J(1997)Congenital heart defects: natural course and in utero development Circulation 96 550-555