胎儿马赛克变异的验证性试验与筛选性试验分析;大规模研究

Pub Date : 2022-03-09 DOI:10.1080/20905068.2021.2010450
S. A. Moosavi, Behnam Hasannejad-Asl, Masoumeh Kourosh Arami, Mahsa Nasuti, M. C. Oğuz, Abdolhosein Naseri
{"title":"胎儿马赛克变异的验证性试验与筛选性试验分析;大规模研究","authors":"S. A. Moosavi, Behnam Hasannejad-Asl, Masoumeh Kourosh Arami, Mahsa Nasuti, M. C. Oğuz, Abdolhosein Naseri","doi":"10.1080/20905068.2021.2010450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Mosaic genetic anomaly is a problematic and interpretative issue in prenatal diagnosis. Conventional karyotyping, as a confirmatory test traditionally used for detecting mosaic and nonmosiac prenatal disorders. Recently Quantitative Fluorescence PCR (QF-PCR) is used for prenatal testing. We retrospectively assessed the frequency of both mosaic and nonmosaic conditions in a large-scale study and compared the clinical value of confirmatory cytogenetic analysis with QF-PCR and other screening tests. Result Of 6033 cases identified as abnormal conditions by sonography or protein marker screening tests, only 180 nonmosaic and 8 mosaic cases confirmed to be abnormal by confirmatory karyotyping test results. The cytogenetic analysis was correlated with other QF-PCR confirmatory test results for nonmosiac conditions but it was not comparable for mosaic cases. Conclusion The cytogenetic analyses were shown to have the greatest clinical value in revealing the various mosaic conditions. The QF-PCR test is shown to be a reliable confirmatory test for nonmosaic diseases but not for mosaicism, and the screening protein marker test can weakly indicate the presence of abnormal cell lines. Moreover, older mothers (>30 years) are at greater risk for developing mosaic ova.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Confirmatory test versus screening test analyses for fetal mosaic variations; a large scale study\",\"authors\":\"S. A. Moosavi, Behnam Hasannejad-Asl, Masoumeh Kourosh Arami, Mahsa Nasuti, M. C. Oğuz, Abdolhosein Naseri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20905068.2021.2010450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background Mosaic genetic anomaly is a problematic and interpretative issue in prenatal diagnosis. Conventional karyotyping, as a confirmatory test traditionally used for detecting mosaic and nonmosiac prenatal disorders. Recently Quantitative Fluorescence PCR (QF-PCR) is used for prenatal testing. We retrospectively assessed the frequency of both mosaic and nonmosaic conditions in a large-scale study and compared the clinical value of confirmatory cytogenetic analysis with QF-PCR and other screening tests. Result Of 6033 cases identified as abnormal conditions by sonography or protein marker screening tests, only 180 nonmosaic and 8 mosaic cases confirmed to be abnormal by confirmatory karyotyping test results. The cytogenetic analysis was correlated with other QF-PCR confirmatory test results for nonmosiac conditions but it was not comparable for mosaic cases. Conclusion The cytogenetic analyses were shown to have the greatest clinical value in revealing the various mosaic conditions. The QF-PCR test is shown to be a reliable confirmatory test for nonmosaic diseases but not for mosaicism, and the screening protein marker test can weakly indicate the presence of abnormal cell lines. Moreover, older mothers (>30 years) are at greater risk for developing mosaic ova.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20905068.2021.2010450\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20905068.2021.2010450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景马赛克遗传异常是产前诊断中的一个问题和解释问题。常规核型,作为一种确证试验传统上用于检测马赛克和非马赛克产前疾病。近年来,定量荧光PCR (QF-PCR)被用于产前检测。在一项大规模研究中,我们回顾性地评估了马赛克和非马赛克条件的频率,并将确证性细胞遗传学分析与QF-PCR和其他筛选试验的临床价值进行了比较。结果6033例超声检查或蛋白标记筛查发现异常的病例中,只有180例非嵌合性和8例嵌合性核型检测结果证实异常。细胞遗传学分析与其他非花叶条件下的QF-PCR验证性测试结果相关,但与花叶病例不具有可比性。结论细胞遗传学分析对揭示不同的花叶情况具有重要的临床价值。QF-PCR试验对非花叶病是可靠的验证试验,但对花叶病不可靠,筛选蛋白标记试验可以微弱地指示异常细胞系的存在。此外,年龄较大的母亲(50至30岁)患马赛克卵子的风险更大。
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
Confirmatory test versus screening test analyses for fetal mosaic variations; a large scale study
ABSTRACT Background Mosaic genetic anomaly is a problematic and interpretative issue in prenatal diagnosis. Conventional karyotyping, as a confirmatory test traditionally used for detecting mosaic and nonmosiac prenatal disorders. Recently Quantitative Fluorescence PCR (QF-PCR) is used for prenatal testing. We retrospectively assessed the frequency of both mosaic and nonmosaic conditions in a large-scale study and compared the clinical value of confirmatory cytogenetic analysis with QF-PCR and other screening tests. Result Of 6033 cases identified as abnormal conditions by sonography or protein marker screening tests, only 180 nonmosaic and 8 mosaic cases confirmed to be abnormal by confirmatory karyotyping test results. The cytogenetic analysis was correlated with other QF-PCR confirmatory test results for nonmosiac conditions but it was not comparable for mosaic cases. Conclusion The cytogenetic analyses were shown to have the greatest clinical value in revealing the various mosaic conditions. The QF-PCR test is shown to be a reliable confirmatory test for nonmosaic diseases but not for mosaicism, and the screening protein marker test can weakly indicate the presence of abnormal cell lines. Moreover, older mothers (>30 years) are at greater risk for developing mosaic ova.
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
×
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