Advertisement

Clinical impacts of genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing for rare autosomal trisomy

Published:October 28, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100790

      ABSTRACT

      BACKGROUND

      Genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing identifies several rare autosomal trisomies in the general obstetrical population, but its use is questioned by its low positive predictive value. Furthermore, the origin of rare autosomal trisomies and the clinical effect of reporting them has not been sufficiently investigated. In addition, professional societies express their need for data assessing the clinical use of genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing for rare autosomal trisomies for years.

      OBJECTIVE

      This study aimed to investigate the origin of rare autosomal trisomies and the clinical effect of disclosing rare autosomal trisomies in clinical settings.

      STUDY DESIGN

      Women who received noninvasive prenatal testing between March 2021 and March 2022 were prospectively enrolled. Clinical follow-up and cytogenetic and molecular investigations were performed. Posthoc analysis was performed to investigate the association between placental mosaicism and clinical outcomes.

      RESULTS

      Overall, 154 rare autosomal trisomies were identified in 89,242 pregnancies (0.17%) through noninvasive prenatal testing. In the 120 cases in which cytogenetic and molecular investigations were carried out, the rare autosomal trisomies were found to originate from true fetal mosaicism (n=5), uniparental disomy (n=5), maternal mosaic trisomy (n=3), maternal malignancy (n=1), and confined placental mosaicism (n=106). Clinical follow-up showed that 40% of all rare autosomal trisomy cases had adverse perinatal outcomes. In women with false-positive noninvasive prenatal testing results originating from confined placental mosaicism, the frequency of adverse perinatal outcomes was 26%. More importantly, the placental mosaicism ratio revealed by noninvasive prenatal testing was significantly higher in women who experienced adverse perinatal outcomes than those who did not (0.688 vs 0.332; P<.001).

      CONCLUSION

      Women with noninvasive prenatal testing results indicative of rare autosomal trisomies are at risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, and that risk can be stratified using chromosomes and the mosaicism ratio revealed by noninvasive prenatal testing. Our data are valuable for obstetrical caregivers advising a patient with a noninvasive prenatal testing result indicative of a rare autosomal trisomy and a false-positive diagnosis and for managing risks during pregnancy.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bianchi DW
        • Chiu RWK.
        Sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA during pregnancy.
        N Engl J Med. 2018; 379: 464-473
        • Norton ME
        • Jacobsson B
        • Swamy GK
        • et al.
        Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy.
        N Engl J Med. 2015; 372: 1589-1597
        • Gadsbøll K
        • Petersen OB
        • Gatinois V
        • et al.
        Current use of noninvasive prenatal testing in Europe, Australia and the USA: a graphical presentation.
        Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020; 99: 722-730
        • Chiu RW
        • Chan KC
        • Gao Y
        • et al.
        Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy by massively parallel genomic sequencing of DNA in maternal plasma.
        Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105: 20458-20463
        • van der Meij KRM
        • Sistermans EA
        • Macville MVE
        • et al.
        TRIDENT-2: national implementation of genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing as a first-tier screening test in the Netherlands.
        Am J Hum Genet. 2019; 105: 1091-1101
        • Van Den Bogaert K
        • Lannoo L
        • Brison N
        • et al.
        Outcome of publicly funded nationwide first-tier noninvasive prenatal screening.
        Genet Med. 2021; 23: 1137-1142
        • Neofytou M.
        Predicting fetoplacental mosaicism during cfDNA-based NIPT.
        Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 32: 152-158
        • Pertile MD
        • Halks-Miller M
        • Flowers N
        • et al.
        Rare autosomal trisomies, revealed by maternal plasma DNA sequencing, suggest increased risk of feto-placental disease.
        Sci Transl Med. 2017; 9: eaan1240
        • van Prooyen Schuurman L
        • Sistermans EA
        • Van Opstal D
        • et al.
        Clinical impact of additional findings detected by genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing: follow-up results of the TRIDENT-2 study.
        Am J Hum Genet. 2022; 109: 1140-1152
        • Li H
        • Durbin R.
        Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform.
        Bioinformatics. 2009; 25: 1754-1760
        • Lau TK
        • Chen F
        • Pan X
        • et al.
        Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of common fetal chromosomal aneuploidies by maternal plasma DNA sequencing.
        J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012; 25: 1370-1374
        • Straver R
        • Sistermans EA
        • Holstege H
        • Visser A
        • Oudejans CB
        • Reinders MJ.
        WISECONDOR: detection of fetal aberrations from shallow sequencing maternal plasma based on a within-sample comparison scheme.
        Nucleic Acids Res. 2014; 42: e31
        • Leung TN
        • Pang MW
        • Daljit SS
        • et al.
        Fetal biometry in ethnic Chinese: biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference and femur length.
        Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 31: 321-327
        • Brison N
        • Neofytou M
        • Dehaspe L
        • et al.
        Predicting fetoplacental chromosomal mosaicism during non-invasive prenatal testing.
        Prenat Diagn. 2018; 38: 258-266
        • Rafalko JM
        • Caldwell S
        • Tynan J
        • Almasri E
        • Weinblatt V
        • McCullough R.
        Impact of mosaicism ratio on positive predictive value of cfDNA screening.
        Prenat Diagn. 2021; 41: 28-34
        • Fan HC
        • Blumenfeld YJ
        • Chitkara U
        • Hudgins L
        • Quake SR.
        Analysis of the size distributions of fetal and maternal cell-free DNA by paired-end sequencing.
        Clin Chem. 2010; 56: 1279-1286
        • Yuan Y
        • Chai X
        • Liu N
        • et al.
        FF-QuantSC: accurate quantification of fetal fraction by a neural network model.
        Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2020; 8: e1232
        • Paulsson K
        • Säll T
        • Fioretos T
        • Mitelman F
        • Johansson B.
        The incidence of trisomy 8 as a sole chromosomal aberration in myeloid malignancies varies in relation to gender, age, prior iatrogenic genotoxic exposure, and morphology.
        Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2001; 130: 160-165
        • Eggenhuizen GM
        • Go A
        • Koster MPH
        • Baart EB
        • Galjaard RJ.
        Confined placental mosaicism and the association with pregnancy outcome and fetal growth: a review of the literature.
        Hum Reprod Update. 2021; 27: 885-903
        • Wang H
        • Luo C
        • Liu Y
        • et al.
        UPD16 itself is not a cause of intrauterine growth restriction.
        Fetal Pediatr Pathol. 2018; 37: 452-464
        • Wang Y
        • Yu D
        • Wei W
        • et al.
        First case report of complete paternal isodisomy of chromosome 10 harbouring a novel variant in COL17A1 that causes junctional epidermolysis bullosa intermediate.
        BMC Med Genomics. 2022; 15: 136
        • Malvestiti F
        • Agrati C
        • Grimi B
        • et al.
        Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis.
        Prenat Diagn. 2015; 35: 1117-1127
        • Benn P
        • Malvestiti F
        • Grimi B
        • Maggi F
        • Simoni G
        • Grati FR.
        Rare autosomal trisomies: comparison of detection through cell-free DNA analysis and direct chromosome preparation of chorionic villus samples.
        Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 54: 458-467
        • Ji X
        • Li J
        • Huang Y
        • et al.
        Identifying occult maternal malignancies from 1.93 million pregnant women undergoing noninvasive prenatal screening tests.
        Genet Med. 2019; 21: 2293-2302
        • Heesterbeek CJ
        • Aukema SM
        • Galjaard RH
        • et al.
        Noninvasive prenatal test results indicative of maternal malignancies: a nationwide genetic and clinical follow-up study.
        J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40: 2426-2435
        • Lannoo L
        • Lenaerts L
        • Van Den Bogaert K
        • et al.
        Non-invasive prenatal testing suggesting a maternal malignancy: what do we tell the prospective parents in Belgium?.
        Prenat Diagn. 2021; 41: 1264-1272
        • Benn P
        • Plon SE
        • Bianchi DW.
        Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: NIPT results suggesting maternal cancer should always be disclosed.
        Prenat Diagn. 2019; 39: 339-343
        • Lenaerts L
        • Brison N
        • Maggen C
        • et al.
        Comprehensive genome-wide analysis of routine non-invasive test data allows cancer prediction: a single-center retrospective analysis of over 85,000 pregnancies.
        EClinicalMedicine. 2021; 35100856
        • Laurie CC
        • Laurie CA
        • Rice K
        • et al.
        Detectable clonal mosaicism from birth to old age and its relationship to cancer.
        Nat Genet. 2012; 44: 642-650
        • Johnson A
        • Wapner RJ
        • Davis GH
        • Jackson LG.
        Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: an association with poor perinatal outcome.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1990; 75: 573-577
        • Eckmann-Scholz C
        • Mallek J
        • von Kaisenberg CS
        • et al.
        Chromosomal mosaicisms in prenatal diagnosis: correlation with first trimester screening and clinical outcome.
        J Perinat Med. 2012; 40: 215-223
        • Toutain J
        • Goutte-Gattat D
        • Horovitz J
        • Saura R.
        Confined placental mosaicism revisited: impact on pregnancy characteristics and outcome.
        PLoS One. 2018; 13e0195905
        • Grati FR
        • Ferreira J
        • Benn P
        • et al.
        Outcomes in pregnancies with a confined placental mosaicism and implications for prenatal screening using cell-free DNA.
        Genet Med. 2020; 22: 309-316
        • Lestou VS
        • Kalousek DK.
        Confined placental mosaicism and intrauterine fetal growth.
        Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1998; 79: F223-F226
        • Coorens THH
        • Oliver TRW
        • Sanghvi R
        • et al.
        Inherent mosaicism and extensive mutation of human placentas.
        Nature. 2021; 592: 80-85
        • Silini AR
        • Di Pietro R
        • Lang-Olip I
        • et al.
        Perinatal derivatives: where do we stand? A roadmap of the human placenta and consensus for tissue and cell nomenclature.
        Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020; 8610544
        • Nowakowska BA
        • Pankiewicz K
        • Nowacka U
        • Niemiec M
        • Kozłowski S
        • Issat T.
        Genetic background of fetal growth restriction.
        Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 23: 36