Prenatal exome sequencing analysis in fetal structural anomalies detected by ultrasonography (PAGE): a cohort study.
Abnormal Karyotype
/ embryology
Abortion, Eugenic
/ statistics & numerical data
Abortion, Spontaneous
/ epidemiology
Congenital Abnormalities
/ diagnosis
DNA Copy Number Variations
/ genetics
Female
Fetal Development
/ genetics
Fetus
/ abnormalities
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Live Birth
/ epidemiology
Male
Nuchal Translucency Measurement
Parents
Perinatal Death
/ etiology
Pregnancy
Prospective Studies
Stillbirth
/ epidemiology
Exome Sequencing
/ methods
Journal
Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 02 2019
23 02 2019
Historique:
received:
06
02
2018
revised:
26
07
2018
accepted:
15
08
2018
pubmed:
5
2
2019
medline:
19
4
2019
entrez:
5
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Fetal structural anomalies, which are detected by ultrasonography, have a range of genetic causes, including chromosomal aneuploidy, copy number variations (CNVs; which are detectable by chromosomal microarrays), and pathogenic sequence variants in developmental genes. Testing for aneuploidy and CNVs is routine during the investigation of fetal structural anomalies, but there is little information on the clinical usefulness of genome-wide next-generation sequencing in the prenatal setting. We therefore aimed to evaluate the proportion of fetuses with structural abnormalities that had identifiable variants in genes associated with developmental disorders when assessed with whole-exome sequencing (WES). In this prospective cohort study, two groups in Birmingham and London recruited patients from 34 fetal medicine units in England and Scotland. We used whole-exome sequencing (WES) to evaluate the presence of genetic variants in developmental disorder genes (diagnostic genetic variants) in a cohort of fetuses with structural anomalies and samples from their parents, after exclusion of aneuploidy and large CNVs. Women were eligible for inclusion if they were undergoing invasive testing for identified nuchal translucency or structural anomalies in their fetus, as detected by ultrasound after 11 weeks of gestation. The partners of these women also had to consent to participate. Sequencing results were interpreted with a targeted virtual gene panel for developmental disorders that comprised 1628 genes. Genetic results related to fetal structural anomaly phenotypes were then validated and reported postnatally. The primary endpoint, which was assessed in all fetuses, was the detection of diagnostic genetic variants considered to have caused the fetal developmental anomaly. The cohort was recruited between Oct 22, 2014, and June 29, 2017, and clinical data were collected until March 31, 2018. After exclusion of fetuses with aneuploidy and CNVs, 610 fetuses with structural anomalies and 1202 matched parental samples (analysed as 596 fetus-parental trios, including two sets of twins, and 14 fetus-parent dyads) were analysed by WES. After bioinformatic filtering and prioritisation according to allele frequency and effect on protein and inheritance pattern, 321 genetic variants (representing 255 potential diagnoses) were selected as potentially pathogenic genetic variants (diagnostic genetic variants), and these variants were reviewed by a multidisciplinary clinical review panel. A diagnostic genetic variant was identified in 52 (8·5%; 95% CI 6·4-11·0) of 610 fetuses assessed and an additional 24 (3·9%) fetuses had a variant of uncertain significance that had potential clinical usefulness. Detection of diagnostic genetic variants enabled us to distinguish between syndromic and non-syndromic fetal anomalies (eg, congenital heart disease only vs a syndrome with congenital heart disease and learning disability). Diagnostic genetic variants were present in 22 (15·4%) of 143 fetuses with multisystem anomalies (ie, more than one fetal structural anomaly), nine (11·1%) of 81 fetuses with cardiac anomalies, and ten (15·4%) of 65 fetuses with skeletal anomalies; these phenotypes were most commonly associated with diagnostic variants. However, diagnostic genetic variants were least common in fetuses with isolated increased nuchal translucency (≥4·0 mm) in the first trimester (in three [3·2%] of 93 fetuses). WES facilitates genetic diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies, which enables more accurate predictions of fetal prognosis and risk of recurrence in future pregnancies. However, the overall detection of diagnostic genetic variants in a prospectively ascertained cohort with a broad range of fetal structural anomalies is lower than that suggested by previous smaller-scale studies of fewer phenotypes. WES improved the identification of genetic disorders in fetuses with structural abnormalities; however, before clinical implementation, careful consideration should be given to case selection to maximise clinical usefulness. UK Department of Health and Social Care and The Wellcome Trust.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Fetal structural anomalies, which are detected by ultrasonography, have a range of genetic causes, including chromosomal aneuploidy, copy number variations (CNVs; which are detectable by chromosomal microarrays), and pathogenic sequence variants in developmental genes. Testing for aneuploidy and CNVs is routine during the investigation of fetal structural anomalies, but there is little information on the clinical usefulness of genome-wide next-generation sequencing in the prenatal setting. We therefore aimed to evaluate the proportion of fetuses with structural abnormalities that had identifiable variants in genes associated with developmental disorders when assessed with whole-exome sequencing (WES).
METHODS
In this prospective cohort study, two groups in Birmingham and London recruited patients from 34 fetal medicine units in England and Scotland. We used whole-exome sequencing (WES) to evaluate the presence of genetic variants in developmental disorder genes (diagnostic genetic variants) in a cohort of fetuses with structural anomalies and samples from their parents, after exclusion of aneuploidy and large CNVs. Women were eligible for inclusion if they were undergoing invasive testing for identified nuchal translucency or structural anomalies in their fetus, as detected by ultrasound after 11 weeks of gestation. The partners of these women also had to consent to participate. Sequencing results were interpreted with a targeted virtual gene panel for developmental disorders that comprised 1628 genes. Genetic results related to fetal structural anomaly phenotypes were then validated and reported postnatally. The primary endpoint, which was assessed in all fetuses, was the detection of diagnostic genetic variants considered to have caused the fetal developmental anomaly.
FINDINGS
The cohort was recruited between Oct 22, 2014, and June 29, 2017, and clinical data were collected until March 31, 2018. After exclusion of fetuses with aneuploidy and CNVs, 610 fetuses with structural anomalies and 1202 matched parental samples (analysed as 596 fetus-parental trios, including two sets of twins, and 14 fetus-parent dyads) were analysed by WES. After bioinformatic filtering and prioritisation according to allele frequency and effect on protein and inheritance pattern, 321 genetic variants (representing 255 potential diagnoses) were selected as potentially pathogenic genetic variants (diagnostic genetic variants), and these variants were reviewed by a multidisciplinary clinical review panel. A diagnostic genetic variant was identified in 52 (8·5%; 95% CI 6·4-11·0) of 610 fetuses assessed and an additional 24 (3·9%) fetuses had a variant of uncertain significance that had potential clinical usefulness. Detection of diagnostic genetic variants enabled us to distinguish between syndromic and non-syndromic fetal anomalies (eg, congenital heart disease only vs a syndrome with congenital heart disease and learning disability). Diagnostic genetic variants were present in 22 (15·4%) of 143 fetuses with multisystem anomalies (ie, more than one fetal structural anomaly), nine (11·1%) of 81 fetuses with cardiac anomalies, and ten (15·4%) of 65 fetuses with skeletal anomalies; these phenotypes were most commonly associated with diagnostic variants. However, diagnostic genetic variants were least common in fetuses with isolated increased nuchal translucency (≥4·0 mm) in the first trimester (in three [3·2%] of 93 fetuses).
INTERPRETATION
WES facilitates genetic diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies, which enables more accurate predictions of fetal prognosis and risk of recurrence in future pregnancies. However, the overall detection of diagnostic genetic variants in a prospectively ascertained cohort with a broad range of fetal structural anomalies is lower than that suggested by previous smaller-scale studies of fewer phenotypes. WES improved the identification of genetic disorders in fetuses with structural abnormalities; however, before clinical implementation, careful consideration should be given to case selection to maximise clinical usefulness.
FUNDING
UK Department of Health and Social Care and The Wellcome Trust.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30712880
pii: S0140-6736(18)31940-8
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31940-8
pmc: PMC6386638
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
747-757Investigateurs
Mark Bateman
(M)
Ian R Berry
(IR)
Sunayna K Best
(SK)
Carolyn Campbell
(C)
Jenni Campbell
(J)
Georgina Carey
(G)
Kate E Chandler
(KE)
Lyn S Chitty
(LS)
Deirdre Cilliers
(D)
Kelly Cohen
(K)
Emma Collingwood
(E)
Panayiotis Constantinou
(P)
Lara Cresswell
(L)
Catherine Delmege
(C)
Ruth Y Eberhardt
(RY)
Sandra L Edwards
(SL)
Richard Ellis
(R)
Jerry Evans
(J)
Thomas Everett
(T)
Clare F Pinto
(CF)
Natalie Forrester
(N)
Emma Fowler
(E)
Carol Gardiner
(C)
Susan Hamilton
(S)
Karen Healey
(K)
Alex Henderson
(A)
Simon T Holden
(ST)
Tessa Homfray
(T)
Rebecca Hudson
(R)
Matthew E Hurles
(ME)
Lucy Jenkins
(L)
Rebecca Keelagher
(R)
Mark D Kilby
(MD)
Tracey Lester
(T)
Rebecca Lewis
(R)
Jenny Lord
(J)
Eamonn R Maher
(ER)
Tamas Marton
(T)
Dominic J McMullan
(DJ)
Sarju Mehta
(S)
Rhiannon Mellis
(R)
Ruth Newbury-Ecob
(R)
Soo-Mi Park
(SM)
Michael Parker
(M)
Katrina Prescott
(K)
Elena Prigmore
(E)
Oliver W Quarrell
(OW)
Elizabeth Quinlan-Jones
(E)
Simon C Ramsden
(SC)
Gabriele Rinck
(G)
Sarah Robart
(S)
Eileen Roberts
(E)
Jayne Rowland
(J)
Richard H Scott
(RH)
James Steer
(J)
Dagmar Tapon
(D)
Emma J Taylor
(EJ)
Madeleine J Tooley
(MJ)
Pradeep C Vasudevan
(PC)
Astrid P Weber
(AP)
Diana G Wellesley
(DG)
Paul Westwood
(P)
Helen White
(H)
Denise Williams
(D)
Elizabeth Wilson
(E)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
Eur J Hum Genet. 2012 Apr;20(4):381-8
pubmed: 22126750
Nat Commun. 2018 Oct 2;9(1):4038
pubmed: 30279509
Am J Med Genet A. 2016 Nov;170(11):2847-2859
pubmed: 27605097
Prenat Diagn. 2018 Jan;38(1):44-51
pubmed: 29266293
Am J Hum Genet. 2016 Aug 4;99(2):451-9
pubmed: 27476655
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jan;37(1):6-14
pubmed: 20658510
BMC Med Genet. 2015 Jun 30;16:45
pubmed: 26123568
Am J Med Genet A. 2017 Jul;173(7):1866-1877
pubmed: 28449295
Genet Med. 2017 Nov;19(11):1207-1216
pubmed: 28518170
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Oct;35(10):1010-7
pubmed: 26275891
Hum Mutat. 2011 Feb;32(2):E2018-25
pubmed: 21280141
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Oct;35(10):1022-9
pubmed: 26275793
Am J Hum Genet. 2013 May 2;92(5):681-95
pubmed: 23623388
Am J Med Genet A. 2016 Dec;170(12):3333-3337
pubmed: 27568880
Am J Hum Genet. 2016 Aug 4;99(2):392-406
pubmed: 27426733
Am J Med Genet A. 2017 Jul;173(7):1739-1746
pubmed: 28498505
Prenat Diagn. 2018 Jan;38(1):10-19
pubmed: 28654730
Genet Med. 2018 Oct;20(10):1216-1223
pubmed: 29323667
Hum Mol Genet. 2014 Jun 15;23(12):3269-77
pubmed: 24476948
Am J Med Genet A. 2015 Nov;167A(11):2702-6
pubmed: 26139517
Genet Med. 2017 Oct;19(10):1171-1178
pubmed: 28425981
Hum Mutat. 2008 Sep;29(9):1125-32
pubmed: 18470948
BMJ. 2017 Jun 14;357:j2563
pubmed: 28615173
JAMA. 2014 Nov 12;312(18):1870-9
pubmed: 25326635
Nature. 2016 Aug 17;536(7616):285-91
pubmed: 27535533
Congenit Heart Dis. 2016 Sep;11(5):452-461
pubmed: 27452334
Blood. 2013 Dec 19;122(26):4289-91
pubmed: 24357714
Prenat Diagn. 2018 Jan;38(1):6-9
pubmed: 29315690
Nat Genet. 2012 May 13;44(6):714-9
pubmed: 22581229
N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2175-84
pubmed: 23215555
Am J Hum Genet. 2014 Apr 3;94(4):574-85
pubmed: 24702954
Lancet. 2015 Apr 4;385(9975):1305-14
pubmed: 25529582
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Nov;35(11):1073-8
pubmed: 26147564
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 Jun;32(6):893-902
pubmed: 25877373
PeerJ. 2016 Apr 26;4:e1955
pubmed: 27168972
Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Mar;24(3):450-4
pubmed: 26081641
Nat Genet. 2010 Sep;42(9):790-3
pubmed: 20711175
Arch Dis Child. 2015 Feb;100(2):158-64
pubmed: 25281733
Prenat Diagn. 2018 Jan;38(1):20-25
pubmed: 28695688
Am J Hum Genet. 2015 Dec 3;97(6):790-800
pubmed: 26637975
Am J Hum Genet. 2009 May;84(5):558-66
pubmed: 19375058
Cell Rep. 2012 Dec 27;2(6):1554-62
pubmed: 23246003
N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2226-32
pubmed: 23215558
Am J Med Genet A. 2016 Nov;170(11):2835-2846
pubmed: 27667800
Genet Med. 2018 Nov;20(11):1430-1437
pubmed: 29595812
Am J Med Genet A. 2016 Sep;170(9):2457-61
pubmed: 27363585