Literature DB >> 31318441

High false-positive non-invasive prenatal screening results for sex chromosome abnormalities: Are maternal factors the culprit?

Bin Zhang1, Qin Zhou1, Yingping Chen1, Ye Shi1, Fangxiu Zheng1, Jianbing Liu1, Bin Yu1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of maternal sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) and copy number variation (CNV) on false-positive results of non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for predicting foetal SCAs.
METHODS: In total, 22 844 pregnant women were recruited to undergo NIPS. Pregnant women with high-risk of SCAs underwent prenatal diagnosis and maternal copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq).
RESULTS: Among 117 women with high-risk of SCAs, 72 accepted prenatal diagnosis, 86 accepted maternal CNV-seq, and 21 had maternal sex chromosome abnormalities. The abnormality rate was significantly higher than women at low-risk of SCAs (24.42% vs 3.51%). Using a novel parameter cffDNA (ChrX)/cffDNA, when the ratio was greater than 2, all foetuses had normal karyotype, and 75.0% (6/8) had abnormal maternal chromosome X. If the ratio was less than or equal to 2, only 10% (4/40) of the mothers had chromosome X CNV alterations, while 33.3% (13/40) of their foetuses had sex chromosomes CNV abnormalities.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 25% of pregnant women with SCAs predicted by NIPS had sex chromosome abnormalities as determined by CNV-seq. The ratio of cffDNA (ChrX)/cffDNA can tentatively distinguish the maternal or foetal origin of abnormal cell-free DNA. In a reanalysis of previous NIPS data, false-positive results caused by maternal CNV might be elucidated.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31318441     DOI: 10.1002/pd.5529

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prenat Diagn        ISSN: 0197-3851            Impact factor:   3.050


  5 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic cytogenetic testing following positive noninvasive prenatal screening results of sex chromosome abnormalities: Report of five cases and systematic review of evidence.

Authors:  Xiaolei Xie; Weihe Tan; Fuguang Li; Eric Carrano; Paola Ramirez; Autumn DiAdamo; Brittany Grommisch; Katherine Amato; Hongyan Chai; Jiadi Wen; Peining Li
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 2.183

2.  Clinical Selection of Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques Following Positive Noninvasive Prenatal Screening Results in Southwest China.

Authors:  Xiaosha Jing; Hongqian Liu; Qian Zhu; Sha Liu; Jianlong Liu; Ting Bai; Cechuan Deng; Tianyu Xia; Yunyun Liu; Jing Cheng; Xiang Wei; Lingling Xing; Yuan Luo; Quanfang Zhou; Lin Chen; Lingping Li; Jiamin Wang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 4.599

3.  Systematic analysis of the causes of NIPS sex chromosome aneuploidy false-positive results.

Authors:  Zhaoru Lyu; Chunhong Huang
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 2.473

Review 4.  Chances and Challenges of New Genetic Screening Technologies (NIPT) in Prenatal Medicine from a Clinical Perspective: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Ivonne Bedei; Aline Wolter; Axel Weber; Fabrizio Signore; Roland Axt-Fliedner
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 4.096

5.  The Optimal Cutoff Value of Z-scores Enhances the Judgment Accuracy of Noninvasive Prenatal Screening.

Authors:  Lingna Zhou; Bin Zhang; Jianbing Liu; Ye Shi; Jing Wang; Bin Yu
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 4.599

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.