Literature DB >> 35277952

Patterns of multiple congenital anomalies in the National Birth Defect Prevention Study: Challenges and insights.

Meredith M Howley1, Eva Williford1, A J Agopian2, Angela E Lin3, Lorenzo D Botto4, Christopher M Cunniff5, Paul A Romitti6, Eirini Nestoridi7, Marilyn L Browne1,8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: About 20%-30% of children with birth defects have multiple major birth defects in more than one organ system, often referred to as multiple congenital anomalies (MCAs). Evaluating the patterns of MCAs can provide clues to the underlying causes, pathogenic mechanisms, and developmental pathways. We sought to explore selected patterns of MCAs within the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (NBDPS), a population-based, case-control study that excluded cases attributed to known chromosomal or single-gene abnormalities.
METHODS: We defined MCAs as having two or more NBDPS-eligible birth defects and calculated the adjusted observed-to-expected ratio for all observed MCA patterns using co-occurring defect analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 50,186 case infants eligible for NBDPS, 2,734 (3.7%) had at least two eligible birth defects. We observed 209 distinct 2-way combinations of birth defects, 297 distinct 3-way combinations, 179 distinct 4-way combinations, and 69 distinct 5-way combinations. Sacral agenesis had the largest proportion of cases with MCAs (70%), whereas gastroschisis had the lowest (3%). Among the cases with MCAs, 63% had a heart defect, 23% had an oral cleft, and 21% had anorectal atresia/stenosis. Of the patterns with adjusted observed-to-expected ratios in the top 20%, most were consistent with the known associations or syndromes, including VATER/VACTERL association and CHARGE syndrome.
CONCLUSIONS: Most but not all patterns that had the highest adjusted observed-to-expected ratios were instances of known syndromes or associations. These findings highlight the importance of considering birth defect combinations that suggest syndromic patterns in the absence of a formal syndromic diagnosis. New approaches for screening for sequences and associations, and VATER/VACTERL in particular, in surveillance systems with limited resources for manual review may be valuable for improving surveillance system quality. The observed MCA patterns within NBDPS may help focus future genetic studies by generating case groups of higher yield.
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  co-occurrence; multiple birth defects; multiple congenital anomalies; observed-to-expected ratio

Year:  2022        PMID: 35277952      PMCID: PMC9464263          DOI: 10.1002/bdr2.2003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth Defects Res            Impact factor:   2.661


  30 in total

Review 1.  The etiology of VACTERL association: Current knowledge and hypotheses.

Authors:  Benjamin D Solomon
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.908

Review 2.  Monitoring for multiple congenital anomalies: an international perspective.

Authors:  M J Khoury; L Botto; P Mastroiacovo; R Skjaerven; E Castilla; J D Erickson
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 6.222

3.  On the measurement and interpretation of birth defect associations in epidemiologic studies.

Authors:  M J Khoury; L M James; J D Erickson
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1990-10

Review 4.  Analytic Methods for Evaluating Patterns of Multiple Congenital Anomalies in Birth Defect Registries.

Authors:  A J Agopian; Jane A Evans; Philip J Lupo
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 2.344

5.  Specific birth defects in pregnancies of women with diabetes: National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997-2011.

Authors:  Sarah C Tinker; Suzanne M Gilboa; Cynthia A Moore; D Kim Waller; Regina M Simeone; Shin Y Kim; Denise J Jamieson; Lorenzo D Botto; Jennita Reefhuis
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-08-24       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Co-occurring defect analysis: A platform for analyzing birth defect co-occurrence in registries.

Authors:  Renata H Benjamin; Xiao Yu; Maria Luisa Navarro Sanchez; Han Chen; Laura E Mitchell; Peter H Langlois; Mark A Canfield; Michael D Swartz; Angela E Scheuerle; Daryl A Scott; Hope Northrup; Christian P Schaaf; Joseph W Ray; Scott D McLean; Philip J Lupo; A J Agopian
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 7.  CHARGE syndrome: an update.

Authors:  Damien Sanlaville; Alain Verloes
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Descriptive and risk factor analysis for choanal atresia: The National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997-2007.

Authors:  Vijaya Kancherla; Paul A Romitti; Lixian Sun; John C Carey; Trudy L Burns; Anna Maria Siega-Riz; Charlotte M Druschel; Angela E Lin; Richard S Olney
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 2.708

9.  Monitoring for multiple malformations in the detection of epidemics of birth defects.

Authors:  M J Khoury; M M Adams; P Rhodes; J D Erickson
Journal:  Teratology       Date:  1987-12

10.  Using log-linear models to test for associations among congenital malformations.

Authors:  T H Beaty; P Yang; M J Khoury; E L Harris; K Y Liang
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1991-06-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.