Literature DB >> 22166281

Use of array genomic hybridization technology in prenatal diagnosis in Canada.

Alessandra Duncan1, Sylvie Langlois.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize for obstetrical care providers the current literature on array genomic hybridization in prenatal diagnosis and to outline the recommendations of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists regarding the use of this new technology with respect to prenatal diagnosis. EVIDENCE: PubMed and Medline were searched for articles published in English between 2004 and 2010, using the key words DNA QF-PCR, quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction, fetal chromosomal abnormalities, prenatal diagnosis, array genomic hybridization, fetal structural anomalies, and copy number variants. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Searches were updated on a regular basis, and articles were incorporated in the guideline to September 2011. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES: The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Array genomic hybridization is not recommended in pregnancies at low risk for a structural chromosomal abnormality; for example, advanced maternal age, positive maternal serum screen, previous trisomy, or the presence of "soft markers" on fetal ultrasound. (III-D) 2. Array genomic hybridization may be an appropriate diagnostic test in cases with fetal structural abnormalities detected on ultrasound or fetal magnetic resonance imaging; it could be done in lieu of a karyotype if rapid aneuploidy screening is negative and an appropriate turnaround time for results is assured. (II-2A) 3. Any pregnant woman who qualifies for microarray genomic hybridization testing should be seen in consultation by a medical geneticist before testing so that the benefits, limitations, and possible outcomes of the analysis can be discussed in detail. The difficulties of interpreting some copy number variants should also be discussed. This will allow couples to make an informed decision about whether or not they wish to pursue such prenatal testing. (III-A).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22166281

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Can        ISSN: 1701-2163


  7 in total

1.  Informed Decision-Making in the Context of Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray.

Authors:  Jessica Baker; Cheryl Shuman; David Chitayat; Syed Wasim; Nan Okun; Johannes Keunen; Renee Hofstedter; Rachel Silver
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women.

Authors:  Mylène Badeau; Carmen Lindsay; Jonatan Blais; Leon Nshimyumukiza; Yemisi Takwoingi; Sylvie Langlois; France Légaré; Yves Giguère; Alexis F Turgeon; William Witteman; François Rousseau
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-11-10

3.  Chromosomal microarray analysis as a first-line test in pregnancies with a priori low risk for the detection of submicroscopic chromosomal abnormalities.

Authors:  Francesco Fiorentino; Stefania Napoletano; Fiorina Caiazzo; Mariateresa Sessa; Sara Bono; Letizia Spizzichino; Anthony Gordon; Andrea Nuccitelli; Giuseppe Rizzo; Marina Baldi
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Whole-genome array CGH evaluation for replacing prenatal karyotyping in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Anita S Y Kan; Elizabeth T Lau; W F Tang; Sario S Y Chan; Simon C K Ding; Kelvin Y K Chan; C P Lee; Pui Wah Hui; Brian H Y Chung; K Y Leung; Teresa Ma; Wing C Leung; Mary H Y Tang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Practice guideline: joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada.

Authors:  Christine M Armour; Shelley Danielle Dougan; Jo-Ann Brock; Radha Chari; Bernie N Chodirker; Isabelle DeBie; Jane A Evans; William T Gibson; Elena Kolomietz; Tanya N Nelson; Frédérique Tihy; Mary Ann Thomas; Dimitri J Stavropoulos
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 6.318

6.  Capturing the clinical utility of genomic testing: medical recommendations following pediatric microarray.

Authors:  Robin Z Hayeems; Ny Hoang; Sebastien Chenier; Dimitri J Stavropoulos; Shuye Pu; Rosanna Weksberg; Cheryl Shuman
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  A novel 1p33p32.2 deletion involving SCP2, ORC1, and DAB1 genes in a patient with craniofacial dysplasia, short stature, developmental delay, and leukoencephalopathy: A case report.

Authors:  Maoying Jiang; Shanlin Wang; Fei Li; Juan Geng; Yiting Ji; Ke Li; Xiaodong Jiang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 1.817

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.