International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis Updated Position Statement on the use of genome-wide sequencing for prenatal diagnosis.
Journal
Prenatal diagnosis
ISSN: 1097-0223
Titre abrégé: Prenat Diagn
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8106540
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
12
04
2022
accepted:
22
04
2022
entrez:
18
5
2022
pubmed:
19
5
2022
medline:
21
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The research and clinical use of genome-wide sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses at risk for genetic disorders have rapidly increased in recent years. Current data indicate that the diagnostic rate is comparable and for certain indications higher than that of standard testing by karyotype and chromosomal microarray. Responsible clinical implementation and diagnostic use of prenatal sequencing depends on standardized laboratory practices and detailed pre-test and post-test counseling. This Updated Position Statement on behalf of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis recommends best practices for the clinical use of prenatal exome and genome sequencing from an international perspective. We include several new points for consideration by researchers and clinical service and laboratory providers.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
796-803Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD055651
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
ISPD, SMFM, PQF. Joint Position Statement from the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD), the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM), and the Perinatal Quality Foundation (PQF) on the use of genome-wide sequencing for fetal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(1):6-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5195
Best S, Wou K, Vora N, Van der Veyver IB, Wapner R, Chitty LS. Promises, pitfalls and practicalities of prenatal whole exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(1):10-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5102
Mellis R, Oprych K, Scotchman E, Hill M, Chitty LS. Diagnostic yield of exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prenat Diagn. 2022:1-XXX. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6115
Kingsmore SF, Cakici JA, Clark MM, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of the analytic and diagnostic performance of singleton and trio, rapid genome and exome sequencing in ill infants. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;105(4):719-733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.08.009
Clark MM, Stark Z, Farnaes L, et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic and clinical utility of genome and exome sequencing and chromosomal microarray in children with suspected genetic diseases. NPJ Genomic Med. 2018;3(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-018-0053-8
Shickh S, Mighton C, Uleryk E, Pechlivanoglou P, Bombard Y. The clinical utility of exome and genome sequencing across clinical indications: a systematic review. Hum Genet. 2021;140(10):1403-1416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-021-02331-x
Manickam K, McClain MR, Demmer LA, et al. Exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability: an evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021;23(11):2029-2037. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01242-6
Malinowski J, Miller DT, Demmer L, et al. Systematic evidence-based review: outcomes from exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability. Genet Med. 2020;22(6):986-1004. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-0771-z
Wang Y, Greenfeld E, Watkins N, et al. Diagnostic yield of genome sequencing for fetal structural anomalies. Prenat Diagn. 2022:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6108
Lord J, McMullan DJ, Eberhardt RY, et al. Prenatal exome sequencing analysis in fetal structural anomalies detected by ultrasonography (PAGE): a cohort study. Lancet. 2019;393(10173):747-757. https://doi.org/10.1530/ey.16.14.14
Petrovski S, Aggarwal V, Giordano JL, et al. Whole-exome sequencing in the evaluation of fetal structural anomalies: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2019;393(10173):758-767. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32042-7
Vears D, Amor DJ. A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: when and for whom? Prenat Diagn. 2022:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6097
Miller DT, Lee K, Gordon AS, et al. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2021 update: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021;23(8):1391-1398. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01171-4
Miller DT, Lee K, Chung WK, et al. ACMG SF v3.0 list for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021;23(8):1381-1390. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01172-3
Wilfond BS, Fernandez CV, Green RC. Disclosing secondary findings from pediatric sequencing to families: considering the "benefit to families". J Law Med Ethics. 2015;43(3):552-558. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlme.12298
ACMG Board of Directors. Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2017;19(7):721-722.
Stals KL, Wakeling M, Baptista J, et al. Diagnosis of lethal or prenatal-onset autosomal recessive disorders by parental exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(1):33-43. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5175
Ali Alghamdi M, Alrasheedi A, Alghamdi E, et al. Molecular autopsy by proxy in preconception counseling. Clin Genet. 2021;100(6):678-691. https://doi.org/10.1111/cge.14049
Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet Med. 2015;17(5):405-424. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.30
Pauta M, Martinez-Portilla RJ, Borrell A. Diagnostic yield of exome sequencing in fetuses with multisystem malformations: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022. Online ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.24862
Pauta M, Martinez-Portilla RJ, Borrell A. Prenatal exome sequencing in recurrent Fetal structural anomalies: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2021;10(20):4739. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10204739
Mellis R, Eberhardt RY, Hamilton SJ, et al. Fetal exome sequencing for isolated increased nuchal translucency: should we be doing it? BJOG. 2022;129(1):52-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16869
Deng L, Liu Y, Yuan M, Meng M, Yang Y, Sun L. Prenatal diagnosis and outcome of fetal hyperechogenic kidneys in the era of antenatal next-generation sequencing. Clin Chim Acta. 2022;528:16-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2022.01.012
Lei TY, She Q, Fu F, et al. Prenatal exome sequencing in fetuses with callosal anomalies. Prenat Diagn. 2022:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6107
Baptiste C, Mellis R, Aggarwal V, et al. Fetal central nervous system anomalies: when should we offer exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn. 2022:42. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6145