TY - JOUR
T1 - Fetal exome sequencing
T2 - yield and limitations in a tertiary referral center
AU - collaborating authors
AU - Daum, H.
AU - Meiner, V.
AU - Elpeleg, O.
AU - Harel, T.
AU - Bar-Or, Libat
AU - Eilat, Avital
AU - Fahham, Duha
AU - Gur, Michal
AU - Hacohen, Nuphar
AU - Kimchi, Adva
AU - Macarov, Michal
AU - Porat, Shay
AU - Rosenak, Daniel
AU - Shaag, Avraham
AU - Shkedi-Rafid, Shiri
AU - Szmulewicz, Adi
AU - Yagel, Simcha
AU - Yanai, Nili
AU - Zvi, Naama
AU - Banne, Ehud
AU - Ben-Yehoshua, Sagi Josefsberg
AU - Ephron, Noa
AU - Lev, Dorit
AU - Drugan, Arie
AU - Irge, Dana
AU - Mordechai, Shikma
AU - Yehuda, Adi Ben
AU - Freireich, Orit
AU - Segel, Reeval
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - Objective: To explore the indications for and diagnostic outcomes of fetal exome sequencing in a tertiary referral center. Methods: Between 2012 and 2017, 77 unrelated fetal samples from pregnancies referred to our center underwent exome sequencing. The cohort included 37 fetuses, 36 products of conception (from cases of pregnancy termination or intrauterine fetal death), one case with DNA from both the fetus and a previous termination of pregnancy, and three cases with DNA of unknown origin. Exome sequencing was performed on DNA extracted from amniocytes or fetal tissue and, in some cases, from parental peripheral blood. Indications, turnaround time, diagnostic rates and pregnancy outcomes were investigated. Diagnostic yield was analyzed according to consanguinity (yes or no), sample type (proband only, or trio or other) and referral indication (malformation or isolated nuchal translucency (NT)). Results: The most common indication for fetal exome sequencing was multiple malformations (21/77, 27%), followed by isolated brain malformation (15/77, 19%). Twelve (16%) fetuses were referred for isolated increased NT. Exome analysis was diagnostic for 16 fetuses (21%); when subclassified into fetal malformations vs isolated increased NT it became clear that exome analysis did not reveal any known or probable pathogenic variants in cases referred for isolated increased NT, whereas, among the remaining fetuses, a molecular diagnosis was reached in 16/65 (25%). Proband-only cases received a diagnosis more often than did cases that had trio exome sequencing. Conclusions: Exome sequencing has the potential to provide molecular diagnoses in cases in which conventional prenatal cytogenetic testing is negative. Referral bias of consanguineous cases could account for the high diagnostic rate of proband-only sequencing. Syndrome-specific prognostic information enables parents to make informed decisions, whereas challenges include time limitations and variant interpretation in the setting of non-specific fetal findings. As we report only established disease–gene associations, further segregation and functional studies in a research setting are expected to increase significantly the diagnostic yield.
AB - Objective: To explore the indications for and diagnostic outcomes of fetal exome sequencing in a tertiary referral center. Methods: Between 2012 and 2017, 77 unrelated fetal samples from pregnancies referred to our center underwent exome sequencing. The cohort included 37 fetuses, 36 products of conception (from cases of pregnancy termination or intrauterine fetal death), one case with DNA from both the fetus and a previous termination of pregnancy, and three cases with DNA of unknown origin. Exome sequencing was performed on DNA extracted from amniocytes or fetal tissue and, in some cases, from parental peripheral blood. Indications, turnaround time, diagnostic rates and pregnancy outcomes were investigated. Diagnostic yield was analyzed according to consanguinity (yes or no), sample type (proband only, or trio or other) and referral indication (malformation or isolated nuchal translucency (NT)). Results: The most common indication for fetal exome sequencing was multiple malformations (21/77, 27%), followed by isolated brain malformation (15/77, 19%). Twelve (16%) fetuses were referred for isolated increased NT. Exome analysis was diagnostic for 16 fetuses (21%); when subclassified into fetal malformations vs isolated increased NT it became clear that exome analysis did not reveal any known or probable pathogenic variants in cases referred for isolated increased NT, whereas, among the remaining fetuses, a molecular diagnosis was reached in 16/65 (25%). Proband-only cases received a diagnosis more often than did cases that had trio exome sequencing. Conclusions: Exome sequencing has the potential to provide molecular diagnoses in cases in which conventional prenatal cytogenetic testing is negative. Referral bias of consanguineous cases could account for the high diagnostic rate of proband-only sequencing. Syndrome-specific prognostic information enables parents to make informed decisions, whereas challenges include time limitations and variant interpretation in the setting of non-specific fetal findings. As we report only established disease–gene associations, further segregation and functional studies in a research setting are expected to increase significantly the diagnostic yield.
KW - chromosomal microarray
KW - fetal exome
KW - fetal malformations
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054280608&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/uog.19168
DO - 10.1002/uog.19168
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 29947050
AN - SCOPUS:85054280608
SN - 0960-7692
VL - 53
SP - 80
EP - 86
JO - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
IS - 1
ER -