常染色体显性单基因遗传病常规产前cfDNA筛查。

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical chemistry Pub Date : 2025-01-03 DOI:10.1093/clinchem/hvae189
Sophie Adams, Olivia Maher Trocki, Christina Miller, Courtney Studwell, Meghan Bombalicki, Lori Dobson, Sofia Horan, Jordan Sargent, Michael Duyzend, Kathryn J Gray, Stephanie Guseh, Louise Wilkins-Haug
{"title":"常染色体显性单基因遗传病常规产前cfDNA筛查。","authors":"Sophie Adams, Olivia Maher Trocki, Christina Miller, Courtney Studwell, Meghan Bombalicki, Lori Dobson, Sofia Horan, Jordan Sargent, Michael Duyzend, Kathryn J Gray, Stephanie Guseh, Louise Wilkins-Haug","doi":"10.1093/clinchem/hvae189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Genetic screening has advanced from prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for aneuploidies (cfDNA-ANP) to single-gene disorders (cfDNA-SGD). Clinical validation studies have been promising in pregnancies with anomalies but are limited in the general population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Chart review and laboratory data identified pregnancies with cfDNA-SGD screening for 25 autosomal dominant conditions at our academic center. Screening was identified as routine by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10 codes and chart review. Ultrasound anomalies or known family history of a condition on the panel were excluded. Retrospective chart review investigated test concordance, outcomes, and phenotypes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>cfDNA-SGD was completed for 3480/37 050 (9.4%) pregnancies, of which 2745 (78.9%) were for routine screening. Fourteen (0.51%, 14/2745) had high-risk results defined as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants: 6 (0.22%) likely fetal variants, and 8 (0.29%) maternal variants with 50% risk for fetal inheritance. Diagnostic testing detected 6/6 fetal and 6/8 maternal cfDNA-SGD variants (2/8 pregnant individuals declined testing but had clinical features on physical exam). Variants were detected in 11/14 pregnancies/newborns and in 9/14 (64.3%) parents/gamete donors. There were no false positives identified by cfDNA-SGD; however, 2 variants were discrepantly classified between the cfDNA-SGD and diagnostic testing laboratories. All pregnancies had normal imaging and 9 had mild postnatal phenotypes. Three terminated pregnancy following diagnostic testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrated that 0.51% of routine cfDNA-SGD was high risk, prompting comprehensive evaluation for pregnancies and parents. Routine cfDNA-SGD allowed for early identification and intervention, but raises counseling challenges due to variable expressivity, limited genotype-phenotype correlations, and discrepant variant classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":10690,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry","volume":"71 1","pages":"129-140"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Routine Prenatal cfDNA Screening for Autosomal Dominant Single-Gene Conditions.\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Adams, Olivia Maher Trocki, Christina Miller, Courtney Studwell, Meghan Bombalicki, Lori Dobson, Sofia Horan, Jordan Sargent, Michael Duyzend, Kathryn J Gray, Stephanie Guseh, Louise Wilkins-Haug\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/clinchem/hvae189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Genetic screening has advanced from prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for aneuploidies (cfDNA-ANP) to single-gene disorders (cfDNA-SGD). Clinical validation studies have been promising in pregnancies with anomalies but are limited in the general population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Chart review and laboratory data identified pregnancies with cfDNA-SGD screening for 25 autosomal dominant conditions at our academic center. Screening was identified as routine by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10 codes and chart review. Ultrasound anomalies or known family history of a condition on the panel were excluded. Retrospective chart review investigated test concordance, outcomes, and phenotypes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>cfDNA-SGD was completed for 3480/37 050 (9.4%) pregnancies, of which 2745 (78.9%) were for routine screening. Fourteen (0.51%, 14/2745) had high-risk results defined as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants: 6 (0.22%) likely fetal variants, and 8 (0.29%) maternal variants with 50% risk for fetal inheritance. Diagnostic testing detected 6/6 fetal and 6/8 maternal cfDNA-SGD variants (2/8 pregnant individuals declined testing but had clinical features on physical exam). Variants were detected in 11/14 pregnancies/newborns and in 9/14 (64.3%) parents/gamete donors. There were no false positives identified by cfDNA-SGD; however, 2 variants were discrepantly classified between the cfDNA-SGD and diagnostic testing laboratories. All pregnancies had normal imaging and 9 had mild postnatal phenotypes. Three terminated pregnancy following diagnostic testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrated that 0.51% of routine cfDNA-SGD was high risk, prompting comprehensive evaluation for pregnancies and parents. Routine cfDNA-SGD allowed for early identification and intervention, but raises counseling challenges due to variable expressivity, limited genotype-phenotype correlations, and discrepant variant classification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical chemistry\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"129-140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae189\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae189","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:遗传筛查已经从产前无细胞DNA (cfDNA)筛查非整倍体(cfDNA- anp)发展到单基因疾病(cfDNA- sgd)。临床验证研究在异常妊娠中很有希望,但在一般人群中有限。方法:在我们的学术中心,通过图表回顾和实验室数据确定了25例常染色体显性遗传病的cfDNA-SGD筛查妊娠。国际疾病分类(ICD) 10号代码和图表审查确定筛查为常规筛查。排除了超声异常或已知的家族史。回顾性图表回顾调查了测试一致性、结果和表型。结果:妊娠3480/ 37050例(9.4%)完成cfDNA-SGD筛查,其中常规筛查2745例(78.9%)。14例(0.51%,14/2745)高危结果定义为致病/可能致病(P/LP)变异;6例(0.22%)可能胎儿变异;8例(0.29%)母体变异,胎儿遗传风险为50%。诊断检测发现6/6胎儿和6/8母体cfDNA-SGD变异(2/8孕妇拒绝检测,但在体检中有临床特征)。在11/14的妊娠/新生儿和9/14(64.3%)的父母/配子供体中检测到变异。cfDNA-SGD检测无假阳性;然而,在cfDNA-SGD和诊断测试实验室之间,有2个变体的分类存在差异。所有妊娠影像正常,9例有轻度产后表型。3例在诊断检测后终止妊娠。结论:我们的研究显示0.51%的常规cfDNA-SGD为高危,需要对孕妇和家长进行综合评估。常规的cfDNA-SGD允许早期识别和干预,但由于可变的表达性,有限的基因型-表型相关性和差异的变体分类,增加了咨询挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Routine Prenatal cfDNA Screening for Autosomal Dominant Single-Gene Conditions.

Background: Genetic screening has advanced from prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for aneuploidies (cfDNA-ANP) to single-gene disorders (cfDNA-SGD). Clinical validation studies have been promising in pregnancies with anomalies but are limited in the general population.

Methods: Chart review and laboratory data identified pregnancies with cfDNA-SGD screening for 25 autosomal dominant conditions at our academic center. Screening was identified as routine by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10 codes and chart review. Ultrasound anomalies or known family history of a condition on the panel were excluded. Retrospective chart review investigated test concordance, outcomes, and phenotypes.

Results: cfDNA-SGD was completed for 3480/37 050 (9.4%) pregnancies, of which 2745 (78.9%) were for routine screening. Fourteen (0.51%, 14/2745) had high-risk results defined as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants: 6 (0.22%) likely fetal variants, and 8 (0.29%) maternal variants with 50% risk for fetal inheritance. Diagnostic testing detected 6/6 fetal and 6/8 maternal cfDNA-SGD variants (2/8 pregnant individuals declined testing but had clinical features on physical exam). Variants were detected in 11/14 pregnancies/newborns and in 9/14 (64.3%) parents/gamete donors. There were no false positives identified by cfDNA-SGD; however, 2 variants were discrepantly classified between the cfDNA-SGD and diagnostic testing laboratories. All pregnancies had normal imaging and 9 had mild postnatal phenotypes. Three terminated pregnancy following diagnostic testing.

Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that 0.51% of routine cfDNA-SGD was high risk, prompting comprehensive evaluation for pregnancies and parents. Routine cfDNA-SGD allowed for early identification and intervention, but raises counseling challenges due to variable expressivity, limited genotype-phenotype correlations, and discrepant variant classification.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry
Clinical chemistry 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
212
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is the premier publication for the science and practice of clinical laboratory medicine. It was established in 1955 and is associated with the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM). The journal focuses on laboratory diagnosis and management of patients, and has expanded to include other clinical laboratory disciplines such as genomics, hematology, microbiology, and toxicology. It also publishes articles relevant to clinical specialties including cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, genetics, immunology, infectious diseases, maternal-fetal medicine, neurology, nutrition, oncology, and pediatrics. In addition to original research, editorials, and reviews, Clinical Chemistry features recurring sections such as clinical case studies, perspectives, podcasts, and Q&A articles. It has the highest impact factor among journals of clinical chemistry, laboratory medicine, pathology, analytical chemistry, transfusion medicine, and clinical microbiology. The journal is indexed in databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science.
期刊最新文献
Reflecting on 70 Years of Clinical Chemistry. Robust Diagnosis of Acute Bacterial and Viral Infections via Host Gene Expression Rank-Based Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithm: A Multi-Cohort Model Development and Validation Study. How Can Digital PCR Support the Rapid Development of New Detection Tests in Future Pandemics? A Multianalyte Machine Learning Model to Detect Wrong Blood in Complete Blood Count Tube Errors in a Pediatric Setting Structural Variation Interpretation in the Genome Sequencing Era: Lessons from Cytogenetics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1