Literature DB >> 22389664

Prenatal detection of aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal arrangements by massively parallel sequencing.

Shan Dan1, Fang Chen, Kwong Wai Choy, Fuman Jiang, Jingrong Lin, Zhaoling Xuan, Wei Wang, Shengpei Chen, Xuchao Li, Hui Jiang, Tak Yeung Leung, Tze Kin Lau, Yue Su, Weiyuan Zhang, Xiuqing Zhang.   

Abstract

Fetal chromosomal abnormalities are the most common reasons for invasive prenatal testing. Currently, G-band karyotyping and several molecular genetic methods have been established for diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities. Although these testing methods are highly reliable, the major limitation remains restricted resolutions or can only achieve limited coverage on the human genome at one time. The massively parallel sequencing (MPS) technologies which can reach single base pair resolution allows detection of genome-wide intragenic deletions and duplication challenging karyotyping and microarrays as the tool for prenatal diagnosis. Here we reported a novel and robust MPS-based method to detect aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal arrangements in amniotic fluid (AF) samples. We sequenced 62 AF samples on Illumina GAIIx platform and with averagely 0.01× whole genome sequencing data we detected 13 samples with numerical chromosomal abnormalities by z-test. With up to 2× whole genome sequencing data we were able to detect microdeletion/microduplication (ranged from 1.4 Mb to 37.3 Mb of 5 samples from chorionic villus sampling (CVS) using SeqSeq algorithm. Our work demonstrated MPS is a robust and accurate approach to detect aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal arrangements in prenatal samples.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22389664      PMCID: PMC3289612          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Chromosomal abnormalities occur in 1 of 160 live births [1].The risk of giving birth to a child with chromosomal abnormalities, especially Down syndrome (OMIM# 190685), increases throughout a woman's reproductive years [2], [3]. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal abnormalities is the most common indication for invasive prenatal testing. The prevalence of chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with aneuploidy accounts for 6–11% of all stillbirths and neonatal deaths [4], [5]. Consequently, screening and diagnostic programs to detect the most common trisomies in live born infants are well established [6]. Currently, G-band karyotyping and several molecular genetic methods including multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), quantitative fluorescent PCR (QF-PCR) and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) have been well established for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities in clinical labs [7], [8]. Although these testing methods have been proved to be highly reliable, the major limitation remains restricted resolution or can only achieve limited coverage on the human genome at one time [9], [10]. To overcome these limitations, in this study we have developed a new method based on massively parallel sequencing (MPS) platform to detect fetal chromosomal abnormalities, which is independent of particular genetic markers and cell culture in medical practice. We directly sequenced 62 DNA samples extracted from uncultured amniotic fluid (AF) of pregnant women. After statistical analysis, we can clearly detect numerical chromosomal abnormalities among 46 chromosomes. The whole process only takes 7 days and the results were validated by full karyotyping analysis. Subsequently, we investigated the presence of copy number variations among 5 prenatal samples previously identified by arrayCGH. We demonstrated that with different whole genome sequencing coverage MPS platform could be applied for identification of aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal arrangements, and those approaches are more sensitive and effective compared with conventional methods.

Results

Detection of Fetal Aneuploidy

In this study, the 32 test cases were used for sequencing analysis under double-blind conditions. For all 62 AF samples (30 normal controls and 32 test cases), we obtained 0.55∼3.28 million 35-bp single-end reads (or 19.25 Mb∼114.80 Mb sequencing data) which corresponds to 0.006∼0.038× human genome depth. Consequently, 0.20∼1.15 million unique reads (UR) were obtained for each sample (Table 1). For each chromosome, the number of unique reads was counted and the UR% was calculated. The complete set of UR% for 62 samples is listed in Table S1. UR% for Chromosome X, Y also showed in Fig. 1. The gender of each sample can be determined from UR% of Chromosome X, Y. For 30 normal control samples, the mean and standard deviation (SD) of UR% for each chromosome were calculated. Then the z-scores of each of the chromosomes, except the Y chromosome, for each of the normal controls and test cases were calculated according to the formula described in (Table S2). From 32 test cases, 5 cases had a z-score>20 for chromosome 18 (indicating Trisomy 18), 6 cases had a z-score>20 for chromosome 21 (indicating Trisomy 21), and 2 cases had a z-score←20 for chromosome X (indicating XO). All the other chromosomes had z-scores within ±3 for all 32 test cases (indicating euploid chromosomes) (Fig. 2, Table. S1). The detection of fetal aneuploidy based on sequencing analysis agreed with karyotyping results.
Table 1

Raw data and UR% of chromosome 21, 18, 13, X, Y of 62 AF sample.

Sample No.Labrary No.Fetal KaryotypeDNA Amount (ng)Raw Data (reads)Unique Data (reads)UR-21%UR-18%UR-13%UR-X%UR-Y%
192H1346XX1001 387 306531 3271.269092.919483.689634.224140.00320
208H946XX1001 649 958622 9281.266382.909973.642484.226330.00385
309H1046XY1001 474 317552 9901.294963.050873.917252.162790.12586
410H1146XY1001 501 313577 4941.296642.980463.742552.127640.12295
511H1246XX1001 341 688514 3661.265252.967543.680264.186710.00447
612H1446XY1001 315 342502 8041.269683.026633.770262.153920.11913
713H1546XX1001 520 307589 7071.261642.932813.707434.176650.00407
815H1846XY1001 548 855589 1731.278743.079743.944342.169820.12560
917HCGY46XY100749 354309 0331.278183.044663.877582.122750.12264
1019H246XY1001 929 900744 1241.309323.088603.909292.216830.12699
1121H446XX1003 285 1061 244 5131.266132.978193.828734.292760.00410
1225H946XY1001 575,322667 9031.327473.001823.868192.165400.12929
1327H146XX100947 196377 6471.279242.917543.670094.091390.02304
1431H646XY1001 248 950476 2051.297762.988633.573042.054580.13776
1532H746XY100693 356268 6921.349872.881373.583282.013830.12840
1633H846XY100929 156371 0801.312392.992623.709712.058050.13825
1734H946XY1001 647 104646 1801.300102.941903.628402.012440.13263
1840H646XX100728 707278 9441.261902.881583.413234.015860.01972
1942H846XY1002 021 819829 3021.298563.007953.828402.082720.13578
2043H946XX100685 181270 5381.279672.902363.525574.064860.02735
2144H1046XY100993 450400 7261.306883.001803.724992.098940.13550
2245H1146XY100636 527250 9311.303152.933083.647622.084640.13709
2346H1246XY1001 010 133399 8491.302492.965123.722162.091290.14480
2447H1346XY100764 726301 4931.284942.958283.582842.088270.13466
2548H146XY1003 003 5051 149 7891.297283.036213.863582.277460.11976
2654H746XY1001 561 427589 1961.299233.039743.853052.129000.12424
2756H946XX1002 322 635885 7071.271192.980223.786134.216180.00339
2857H1046XX1001 278 926512 3101.292192.899613.577914.064140.02264
2960H1446XY1001 618 924616 4221.264563.064953.950382.135550.12475
3062H1646XY100661 358263 4581.308752.894203.735322.175300.12791
3161HWMH47XX+21100833 041340 6931.856512.981573.710094.056440.01967
3272HT2147XY+21100766 103311 8521.935853.010723.826172.136270.12955
3374H347XX+211001 127 241458 7431.910872.817053.540334.030800.02180
3481HWMH47XX+21100650 242273 3031.734342.777143.392573.968120.02378
3502H247XY+18901 091 649429 5441.282064.398623.648522.055440.12828
3606H747XY+181001 851 667706 6511.266894.542983.718812.101740.12198
3782HCXP47XY+18100503 179204 2951.277074.427423.788151.998580.11601
3804H446XY1001 754 104666 0021.298192.941883.679572.125070.11662
3905H646XX1002 434 717898 9661.276802.904563.578894.132970.00389
4063H1746XY90.8685 313275 1771.309702.986803.869152.048500.14064
4165H446XY1001 202 799473 1401.322442.971853.702082.074020.14879
4266H946XX1001 623 201617 3371.278882.961663.836804.277240.00340
4367H1046XX100811 894327 3821.284432.856603.645664.100710.02474
4468H1146XY1006 381 6432 455 2681.296193.079793.966162.151500.12931
4569H1246XX100955 289384 7841.283842.932813.627234.140500.02339
4670H1346XX100833 449328 8631.255542.912153.661474.132120.02037
4771H1446XX1001 321 322523 5361.299432.874303.565374.043270.02636
4873H246XY100705 325277 7051.324432.940173.722302.073420.12639
4977H846XX100664 485271 2941.284222.958053.746864.100350.02101
5083HSHD46XX100551 560223 9881.264802.936323.666574.012270.02411
5107H846XY1001 383 844525 1061.282033.062433.920352.233640.12950
5294HLCH46XY100888 892509 3861.290973.026393.871132.173990.11661
5395HSCJ46XX100863 603498 3461.267192.939323.749204.134080.00301
5496HLLR45XO100880 178508 2981.297273.027753.677762.117660.00315
5597HHH45XO100984 935565 9601.291612.994203.875722.177190.00166
5698HMCM47XX+21100525 892303 3071.896102.893443.475364.104750.00396
5799HZQL46XX100898 477518 3301.297052.986643.776554.197130.00251
58118AXCR46XX991 132 088440 2451.274063.046033.828102.143350.12402
59121ASSH47XY+211001 045 028394 9851.936283.028473.726982.079830.12557
60125A2246XX1001 217 046469 0951.263503.037553.794544.228570.00384
61126AJYJ47XY+181001 207 389471 2231.220444.519523.771892.118950.11948
62129AGJ47XX+181001 181 077449 1141.253584.370833.694614.205390.00178
Figure 1

UR-X% and UR-Y% of 62 amniotic fluid samples.

Figure 2

z-scores of 62 AF samples for chromosome 21,18 and X determined by MPS.

Broken lines indicate the z score cut-off value of ±3 for trisomy 21 and trisomy 18. All 11 trisomy cases have a z-score value greater than 3 and the 2 cases of Tuner syndrome have a z-score value less than minus 3.

z-scores of 62 AF samples for chromosome 21,18 and X determined by MPS.

Broken lines indicate the z score cut-off value of ±3 for trisomy 21 and trisomy 18. All 11 trisomy cases have a z-score value greater than 3 and the 2 cases of Tuner syndrome have a z-score value less than minus 3. Normalized UR% values for all 22 autosomes and chromosome X were calculated (Fig. 3). 5 cases of trisomy 18, 6 cases of trisomy 21 and 2 cases of XO were successfully detected in the cohort of 32 test cases, which presented 100% of sensitivity and 100% of specificity.
Figure 3

The normalized UR% value per chromosome between different samples.

11 trisomy samples have a normalized UR% value of 1.5 and 2 cases of 45 XO have a normalized UR% value of 0.5.

The normalized UR% value per chromosome between different samples.

11 trisomy samples have a normalized UR% value of 1.5 and 2 cases of 45 XO have a normalized UR% value of 0.5.

Detection of imbalanced chromosomal arrangements

To further validated our developed and optimized analysis method among cases with imbalanced chromosomal arrangements, we obtained 44∼70 M sequence tags for the 5 “known” samples with 1.4 to 2.3× whole genome depth. To detect segmental copy number variations, a sequence-based Matlab CNV detection package, SegSeq, with YH reference genome as comparative genome were used. By applying the SegSeq analysis, we detected microdeletions and microduplications in all 5 samples (Table 2). All the 5 chromosomal copy number variations ranged from 1.4 Mb to 37.3 Mb were validated by arrayCGH and were mapped precisely to the correct location. Four pregnancies were terminated after genetic detection and only one pregnant gave a live birth (Table S3).
Table 2

Pathogenic chromosomal copy number changes and imbalance rearrangements identified by SeqSeq analysis which have been validated by arrayCGH.

Array No.KaryotypearrayCGHSegseq
A1007165946,XYdeletion at 13q32.3q33.3(97091318∼106466788)deletion at chr13: 97075576∼106516365(9.4 M)
A1002139046,XY,der(5)t(5;18)(p13;q12.3)deletion at 5p15.3∼p13.2(183931∼36816731);duplication at 18p12.3∼q23(39086755∼76067279)deletion at chr5: 1∼36861739(36.9 M);duplication at chr18: 38768509∼76117152(37.3 M)
A1002138346,XY,2q+duplication at 2q36∼q37.3(230369496∼242444380)duplication at chr2: 230288772∼242427293(12.1 M)
A1109184446,XXdeletion at 3q29(197216353∼198770242)deletion at chr3: 197372027∼198831453(1.4 M)
A1007171046,XYdeletion at 22q11.21(17289032∼19636115)deletion at chr22: 17396815∼20248184(2.8 M)
Two samples (A10021383, A10071659) were selected to further ascertain the results on the HumanOmni2.5 M chip (Illumina). CNV partition Algorithm plug-in, was used to detect copy number variations in these two samples. A duplication at 2q36∼q37.3 (230369496∼242444380) and a deletion at 13q32.3q33.3 (97091318∼106462788) were correctly detected, totally in concordance with the arrayCGH and sequencing analysis results.

Discussion

Massively parallel sequencing has been reported only to apply in noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 based on cell-free fetal DNA, due to it is limited amount of fragmented fetal DNA [11]. This also makes noninvasive MPS-based prenatal diagnosis difficult to detect all the chromosomal aneuploidies and the sexual chromosome abnormality accurately. In this study, we demonstrated for the first time that combined MPS with powerful bioinformatics analysis method can accurately diagnosis fetal aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal structural abnormalities. In fact, this study reports the first retrospective use of MPS (so called next generation sequencing) for prenatal diagnostics of chromosomal imbalance rearrangements to date and shows that it is practically feasible on a large-scale prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal abnormalities. By establishing a normal control sequencing tag data set, we have been able to demonstrate this new approach only requires a minimum among of DNA materials (100 ng) to achieve the identification of aneuploidies with a ultra low sequencing coverage (0.01×). Comparing to the golden standard (G-Band karyotyping) in clinical practice, MPS has no time limitation. Also as long as 100 ng genomic DNA can be extracted from tissues at any gestational weeks, MPS can be performed and report all fetal aneuploidies in 7 days. If necessary, more sequence reads can be performed to detect whether microdeletion or microduplication exists in the fetal genome which may result in severe developmental retardation. In our study, tissues obtained from fetus, such as amniotic fluid, CVS and placenta can be analyzed without cell culture since 100 ng genomic DNA is sufficient for library preparation and sequencing. So it can be used for the research into the molecular mechanism of miscarriage, stillbirth and fetal death when tissues are difficult to culture. Furthermore, our validation study on the 5 arrayCGH samples show that when more sophisticated sequencing protocols and bioinformatics algorithms are applied to the analysis, it is possible to detect smaller size chromosomal copy number variations as well as complex rearrangements across the whole genome of the fetus, such as balanced chromosomal arrangements,structure variations or even single-gene disorders. With the application of third-generation sequencing system in clinical laboratories, such as Miseq/Illumina and Ion Torrent PGM/Life Technologies, the whole process will take less time and acceptable price. Thus, it is likely that MPS will play an increasingly important role in the future development of prenatal screening and diagnosis. A potential weakness of the study was that in the figure of describing the ratio of unique reads in each chromosome, chromosome19 and 22 have a differently huge coefficient of variation because of their extremely high GC content and made the detection of trisomy19 and trisomy22 difficult. Further study will be set up to deal with these problems, for example the computational correction of GC content among chromosomes. Other chromosomal abnormalities, such as balanced translocation or incomplete aneuploidy caused by mosaics or partial duplication or deletion of a chromosome should, in principle, also be detectable. Further studies are required to determine the effectiveness of massively parallel genomic sequencing in detecting these rare aberrations. Another weakness for the new methodology was the starting materials for library construction; with the conventional Illumina library construction approach100 ng genomic DNA of fetus was required. To further reduce the risk to pregnancies it would be important to reduce the amount for AF or CVS samples, other library construction methods such as using in vitro transposition may be an alternative solution. In conclusion, we have demonstrated the usefulness of massively parallel sequencing to detect fetal aneuploidy and imbalanced chromosomal abnormalities of genomic DNA in prenatal samples. In principle, massively parallel sequencing can also reveal other features of the genomic material from amniotic fluid such as histone modifications as well as epigenetic DNA methylation. With the rapid reduction of sequencing cost, we expect that the strategy described in this article will become a powerful tool in the detection of all kinds of chromosomal abnormalities in clinical settings.

Materials and Methods

Subject Enrollment and Sample Recruitment

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology hospital of the Capital Medical University. Informed consent was obtained from each participant. A total of 32 pregnant women at a high risk of Down's syndrome were recruited as test cases from the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology hospital during the period of January to May 2010. Amniocentesis was applied at 19∼22th gestational week and standard G-band karyotyping analysis was performed. Another 30 euploid AF samples (20 with male fetus and 10 with female fetus) were included as normal control at the same hospital. To validate the sensitivity of analysis method for detection of microdeletion/microduplication, 5 chorionic villus sampling (CVS) samples validated by karyotyping and arrayCGH were recruited from the Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis Centre (PGDC) at Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Sample Preparation and Sequencing

Genomic DNA was extracted from uncultured AF samples with Micro DNA Kit (Tiangen) and quantified with the Quant-iT dsDNA HS Assay Kit (Invitrogen). 100 ng genomic DNA from each sample was sheared into small fragments ranged from 100 to 400 bp with Bioruptor (Diagenode). After end-repair, “A”- overhanging and adapter-ligation, DNA fragments of 300 bp (±25 bp) in length were selected by 2% agarose gel electrophoresis and underwent 12 cycles of PCR with multiplex primers. PCR products were purified by Agencourt AMPure Kit (Beckman). Size distribution of the library was detected by Agilent Bioanalyzer DNA 1000 kit (Agilent Technologies) and the concentration was measured by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Libraries with different index tags were mixed in equal moles into a pool and sequenced with single-end 36 cycle multiplex sequencing on Illumina GAIIx platform. For the 5 DNA samples from CVS tissues, sequencing libraries with the insert size of 500 bp (±25 bp) were prepared. Paired-end 100 cycle multiplex sequencing was performed on Illumina HiSeq 2000.

Bioinformatics analysis

z-score for detection of fetal aneuploidy

35-bp single-end reads from 62 AF samples (30 normal controls and 32 test cases) were aligned against repeat-masked human genome build 36 (hg18) by ELAND. Unique reads (UR), which can be mapped to reference genome sequence without any mismatches or alternative positions, were used for further analysis. The UR percentage (UR%) of chromosome N (UR-N%, N denotes chromosome number) can be used as an indicator of fetal trisomy for autosomes. To satisfy central-limit theorem, 30 euploid samples were used as normal controls. The z-score of chromosome N (N stands for chromosome numbers) is calculated as,For autosomes, considering about the type I error rate (α) of 0.01, 3 was set as a cut-off value to determine the fetal trisomy.

SegSeq algorithm for detection of microdeletion/microduplication

We mapped the Illumina reads to the reference sequence of human genome (HG18, NCBI 36.3) by Short Oligonucleotide Analysis Package aligner (SOAP2) (http://soap.genomics.org.cn/) [12] with parameter about total allowed mismatches (-v 5), seed length (-s 40), minimal aligning length (-l 40) and insert DNA size enabled. Only unique reads were remained in following CNV analysis. For the CNV detection, we employed a MATLAB packet, SegSeq (http://www.broadinstitute.org/cgi-bin/cancer/publications/pub_paper.cgi?mode=view&paper_id=182) [13], with YH Illumina reads [14] as reference control. Segments with copy ratio, calculated by SegSeq, less than 0.75 or greater than 1.25 were reported as variations. CNVs on critical regions of identified diseases would be an important signal for clinical screening/diagnose.

CNV Detection by arrayCGH and SNP typing array

Genomic chromosomal copy number variants (CNVs) were detected using a targeted high resolution 44 K oligonucleotide array specifically constructed for prenatal screening with the intention of targeting common trisomic aneuploidies and most known microdeletion and microduplication syndromes. This Fetal DNA chip included telomeric and pericentromeric regions, examining the genome to a resolution of 100 kb (http://www.fetalmedicine.hk/en/Fetal_DNA_Chip.asp) [15]. The Fetal DNA chip is specially (http://www.fetalmedicine.hk/en/Fetal_DNA_chip/Appendix_I.pdf) with most of the known common non-pathogenic CNVs regions removed. This chip provides a means to detect chromosomal aberrations with resolution of <100 Kb across the genome. The quality of the array was analysed using Agilent DNA analytics software and cases where the Derivative Log Ratio spread of the array was >0.25 were excluded from further data analysis. Data reporting variations in copy number were released after excluding known non-pathogenic chromosome copy number variants that have been listed at the Database of Genomic Variants. To ascertain the accuracy of MSP-based CNV detection method, two CVS samples were analyzed with HumanOmni2.5-Quad Bead Chip according to Illumina manufacturer's protocol and CNV partition plug-in software was employed for DNA copy number analysis. The UR% of each chromosome for 62 AF samples. (XLS) Click here for additional data file. The z-scores of each chromosome (except chr Y) for 62 AF samples. (XLS) Click here for additional data file. Outcome and clinical data of CUHK cases. (XLS) Click here for additional data file.
  14 in total

1.  Comparison of models of maternal age-specific risk for Down syndrome live births.

Authors:  J K Morris; N J Wald; D E Mutton; E Alberman
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Genetics of stillbirth.

Authors:  Ronald J Wapner
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.190

Review 3.  Guidelines for molecular karyotyping in constitutional genetic diagnosis.

Authors:  Joris Robert Vermeesch; Heike Fiegler; Nicole de Leeuw; Karoly Szuhai; Jacqueline Schoumans; Roberto Ciccone; Frank Speleman; Anita Rauch; Jill Clayton-Smith; Conny Van Ravenswaaij; Damien Sanlaville; Philippos C Patsalis; Helen Firth; Koen Devriendt; Orsetta Zuffardi
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2007-07-18       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  SOAP2: an improved ultrafast tool for short read alignment.

Authors:  Ruiqiang Li; Chang Yu; Yingrui Li; Tak-Wah Lam; Siu-Ming Yiu; Karsten Kristiansen; Jun Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Cytogenetic analysis after evaluation of 750 fetal deaths: proposal for diagnostic workup.

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

Review 6.  Clinical practice. Prenatal screening for aneuploidy.

Authors:  Deborah A Driscoll; Susan Gross
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Rates of chromosome abnormalities at different maternal ages.

Authors:  E B Hook
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  The diploid genome sequence of an Asian individual.

Authors:  Jun Wang; Wei Wang; Ruiqiang Li; Yingrui Li; Geng Tian; Laurie Goodman; Wei Fan; Junqing Zhang; Jun Li; Juanbin Zhang; Yiran Guo; Binxiao Feng; Heng Li; Yao Lu; Xiaodong Fang; Huiqing Liang; Zhenglin Du; Dong Li; Yiqing Zhao; Yujie Hu; Zhenzhen Yang; Hancheng Zheng; Ines Hellmann; Michael Inouye; John Pool; Xin Yi; Jing Zhao; Jinjie Duan; Yan Zhou; Junjie Qin; Lijia Ma; Guoqing Li; Zhentao Yang; Guojie Zhang; Bin Yang; Chang Yu; Fang Liang; Wenjie Li; Shaochuan Li; Dawei Li; Peixiang Ni; Jue Ruan; Qibin Li; Hongmei Zhu; Dongyuan Liu; Zhike Lu; Ning Li; Guangwu Guo; Jianguo Zhang; Jia Ye; Lin Fang; Qin Hao; Quan Chen; Yu Liang; Yeyang Su; A San; Cuo Ping; Shuang Yang; Fang Chen; Li Li; Ke Zhou; Hongkun Zheng; Yuanyuan Ren; Ling Yang; Yang Gao; Guohua Yang; Zhuo Li; Xiaoli Feng; Karsten Kristiansen; Gane Ka-Shu Wong; Rasmus Nielsen; Richard Durbin; Lars Bolund; Xiuqing Zhang; Songgang Li; Huanming Yang; Jian Wang
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-11-06       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  High-resolution mapping of copy-number alterations with massively parallel sequencing.

Authors:  Derek Y Chiang; Gad Getz; David B Jaffe; Michael J T O'Kelly; Xiaojun Zhao; Scott L Carter; Carsten Russ; Chad Nusbaum; Matthew Meyerson; Eric S Lander
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2008-11-30       Impact factor: 28.547

10.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  12 in total

1.  Comparative study of aCGH and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) for chromosomal microdeletion and microduplication screening.

Authors:  Claudio Dello Russo; Gianluca Di Giacomo; Pietro Cignini; Francesco Padula; Lucia Mangiafico; Alvaro Mesoraca; Laura D'Emidio; Megan R McCluskey; Arianna Paganelli; Claudio Giorlandino
Journal:  J Prenat Med       Date:  2014 Apr-Jun

2.  Routing of Biomolecules and Transgenes' Vectors in Nuclei of Oocytes.

Authors:  Marek Malecki; Bianca Malecki
Journal:  J Fertili In Vitro       Date:  2012-04-30

3.  Performance comparison between rapid sequencing platforms for ultra-low coverage sequencing strategy.

Authors:  Shengpei Chen; Sheng Li; Weiwei Xie; Xuchao Li; Chunlei Zhang; Haojun Jiang; Jing Zheng; Xiaoyu Pan; Hancheng Zheng; Jia Sophie Liu; Yongqiang Deng; Fang Chen; Hui Jiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Clinical and genomic evaluation of a Chinese patient with a novel deletion associated with Phelan-McDermid syndrome.

Authors:  Dongzhu Lei; Shaoyuan Li; Santasree Banerjee; Haoqing Zhang; Caiyun Li; Shuai Hou; Danjing Chen; Haiying Yan; Hanmei Li; Huan Huan Peng; Saijun Liu; Xinxin Zhang; Zhiyu Peng; Jian Wang; Huanming Yang; Hui Huang; Jing Wu
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-12-06

5.  A single cell level based method for copy number variation analysis by low coverage massively parallel sequencing.

Authors:  Chunlei Zhang; Chunsheng Zhang; Shengpei Chen; Xuyang Yin; Xiaoyu Pan; Ge Lin; Yueqiu Tan; Ke Tan; Zhengfeng Xu; Ping Hu; Xuchao Li; Fang Chen; Xun Xu; Yingrui Li; Xiuqing Zhang; Hui Jiang; Wei Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Exome Sequencing in Fetuses with Structural Malformations.

Authors:  Fiona L Mackie; Keren J Carss; Sarah C Hillman; Matthew E Hurles; Mark D Kilby
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 7.  Application of next-generation sequencing in clinical oncology to advance personalized treatment of cancer.

Authors:  Yan-Fang Guan; Gai-Rui Li; Rong-Jiao Wang; Yu-Ting Yi; Ling Yang; Dan Jiang; Xiao-Ping Zhang; Yin Peng
Journal:  Chin J Cancer       Date:  2012-09-17

8.  Exome sequencing improves genetic diagnosis of structural fetal abnormalities revealed by ultrasound.

Authors:  Keren J Carss; Sarah C Hillman; Vijaya Parthiban; Dominic J McMullan; Eamonn R Maher; Mark D Kilby; Matthew E Hurles
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 6.150

Review 9.  Non-Invasive Screening Tools for Down's Syndrome: A Review.

Authors:  Kelly A Sillence; Tracey E Madgett; Llinos A Roberts; Timothy G Overton; Neil D Avent
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2013-05-31

Review 10.  The clinical utility of microarray technologies applied to prenatal cytogenetics in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Jonathan L A Callaway; Lisa G Shaffer; Lyn S Chitty; Jill A Rosenfeld; John A Crolla
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2013-09-08       Impact factor: 3.050

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.