OBJECTIVE: Accumulating evidence suggests that genomic structural variations, particularly copy number variations (CNV), are a common occurrence in humans that may bear phenotypic consequences for living individuals possessing the variant. While precise estimates vary, large-scale karyotypic abnormalities are present in 6-12% of stillbirths (SB). However, due to inherent limitations of conventional cytogenetics, the contribution of genomic aberrations to stillbirth is likely underrepresented. High-resolution copy number variant analysis by genomic array-based profiling may overcome such limitations. METHODS: Prospectively acquired SB cases > 22 weeks underwent classification of 'unexplained' stillbirth by Wigglesworth and Aberdeen criteria after extensive testing and rigorous multidisciplinary audit. Genome-wide analysis was conducted using high-resolution Illumina single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays (Human CNV370-Duo) on placental and fetal samples. Potential alternate detection methods were completed by one or more of three independent means (quantitative PCR, Illumina1M, or Agilent105K comparative genomic hybridization arrays). RESULTS: In our cohort of 54 stillbirths, 29 met strict unexplained criteria. Among these, we identified 24 putative novel CNVs. Subsequent interrogation detected 18 of 24 CNVs (75%) in placental samples, 8 of which were also confirmed in available fetal samples; none were present in maternal blood. CONCLUSION: We describe the potential of whole-genome placental profiling to identify small genomic imbalances, which might contribute to a small proportion of well-characterized, unexplained stillbirths.
OBJECTIVE: Accumulating evidence suggests that genomic structural variations, particularly copy number variations (CNV), are a common occurrence in humans that may bear phenotypic consequences for living individuals possessing the variant. While precise estimates vary, large-scale karyotypic abnormalities are present in 6-12% of stillbirths (SB). However, due to inherent limitations of conventional cytogenetics, the contribution of genomic aberrations to stillbirth is likely underrepresented. High-resolution copy number variant analysis by genomic array-based profiling may overcome such limitations. METHODS: Prospectively acquired SB cases > 22 weeks underwent classification of 'unexplained' stillbirth by Wigglesworth and Aberdeen criteria after extensive testing and rigorous multidisciplinary audit. Genome-wide analysis was conducted using high-resolution Illumina single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays (Human CNV370-Duo) on placental and fetal samples. Potential alternate detection methods were completed by one or more of three independent means (quantitative PCR, Illumina1M, or Agilent105K comparative genomic hybridization arrays). RESULTS: In our cohort of 54 stillbirths, 29 met strict unexplained criteria. Among these, we identified 24 putative novel CNVs. Subsequent interrogation detected 18 of 24 CNVs (75%) in placental samples, 8 of which were also confirmed in available fetal samples; none were present in maternal blood. CONCLUSION: We describe the potential of whole-genome placental profiling to identify small genomic imbalances, which might contribute to a small proportion of well-characterized, unexplained stillbirths.
Authors: Jennifer E Warren; David K Turok; Teresa M Maxwell; Arthur R Brothman; Robert M Silver Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Fleurisca J Korteweg; Katelijne Bouman; Jan Jaap H M Erwich; Albertus Timmer; Nic J G M Veeger; Joke M Ravisé; Thomas H Nijman; Jozien P Holm Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Gordana Raca; Amber Artzer; Laura Thorson; Suzanne Huber; Peggy Modaff; Jennifer Laffin; Richard M Pauli Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Donald J Dudley; Robert Goldenberg; Deborah Conway; Robert M Silver; George R Saade; Michael W Varner; Halit Pinar; Donald Coustan; Radek Bukowski; Barbara Stoll; Matthew A Koch; Corette B Parker; Uma M Reddy Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Weimin Bi; Amy M Breman; Susan F Venable; Patricia A Eng; Trilochan Sahoo; Xin-Yan Lu; Ankita Patel; Arthur L Beaudet; Sau Wai Cheung; Lisa D White Journal: Prenat Diagn Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 3.050
Authors: Ignatia B Van den Veyver; Ankita Patel; Chad A Shaw; Amber N Pursley; Sung-Hae L Kang; Marcia J Simovich; Patricia A Ward; Sandra Darilek; Anthony Johnson; Sarah E Neill; Weimin Bi; Lisa D White; Christine M Eng; James R Lupski; Sau Wai Cheung; Arthur L Beaudet Journal: Prenat Diagn Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.050
Authors: Björn Menten; Katrien Swerts; Barbara Delle Chiaie; Sandra Janssens; Karen Buysse; Jan Philippé; Frank Speleman Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2009-09-14 Impact factor: 2.103
Authors: Andrew Z Carey; Nathan R Blue; Michael W Varner; Jessica M Page; Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk; Aaron R Quinlan; D Ware Branch; Robert M Silver; Tsegaselassie Workalemahu Journal: Front Reprod Health Date: 2021-12-15
Authors: Uma M Reddy; Grier P Page; George R Saade; Robert M Silver; Vanessa R Thorsten; Corette B Parker; Halit Pinar; Marian Willinger; Barbara J Stoll; Josefine Heim-Hall; Michael W Varner; Robert L Goldenberg; Radek Bukowski; Ronald J Wapner; Carolyn D Drews-Botsch; Barbara M O'Brien; Donald J Dudley; Brynn Levy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J W Nijkamp; N J Sebire; K Bouman; F J Korteweg; J J H M Erwich; S J Gordijn Journal: Semin Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2017-03-18 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Dana A Muin; Martina Kollmann; Jasmin Blatterer; Gregor Hoermann; Peter W Husslein; Ingrid Lafer; Erwin Petek; Thomas Schwarzbraun Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Liina Nagirnaja; Priit Palta; Laura Kasak; Kristiina Rull; Ole B Christiansen; Henriette S Nielsen; Rudi Steffensen; Tõnu Esko; Maido Remm; Maris Laan Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 4.878