Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Potential influence of parental copy number variations on noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT): two case reports.


ABSTRACT: Background:Small subchromosomal deletions and duplications caused by copy number variants (CNVs) can now be detected with noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) technology. However, the clinical utility and validity of this screening for CNVs are still unknown. Here, we discuss some special conditions in which both cases simultaneously exhibited false positives caused by maternal CNVs and false negatives due to limitations of the technology. Case presentation:In case 1, NIPT indicated a 1.1?Mb deletion at 21q21.1, but the umbilical cord for array CGH (aCGH) revealed a 422?kb deletion at 15q13.3. Peripheral blood of the parents for aCGH showed a 1.1?Mb deletion at 21q21.1 in the mother's sample, and the same deletion at 15q13.3 was detected in the father's blood. In case 2, NIPT showed a 1.5?Mb deletion at 22q11.21, but aCGH of amniocytes revealed a 1.377?Mb duplication rather than a 1.5?Mb deletion at 22q11.21. Furthermore, aCGH analysis of the parental blood revealed a 647?kb deletion at 22q11.21 in the mother and a 2.8?Mb duplication of 22q11.21 in the father. Conclusions:Our findings not only highlight the significance of diagnostic testing following a positive cfDNA sequencing result but also the necessity for additional analytical and clinical validation before routine use in practice.

SUBMITTER: Qi Y 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7249382 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Potential influence of parental copy number variations on noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT): two case reports.

Qi Yiming Y   Yang Jiexia J   Hou Yaping Y   Hu Rong R   Wang Dongmei D   Peng Haishan H   Yin Aihua A  

Molecular cytogenetics 20200525


<h4>Background</h4>Small subchromosomal deletions and duplications caused by copy number variants (CNVs) can now be detected with noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) technology. However, the clinical utility and validity of this screening for CNVs are still unknown. Here, we discuss some special conditions in which both cases simultaneously exhibited false positives caused by maternal CNVs and false negatives due to limitations of the technology.<h4>Case presentation</h4>In case 1, NIPT indicate  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC8045328 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6716937 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4230093 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8149898 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5811538 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7460070 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7866698 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7574418 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6785431 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4112725 | biostudies-literature