Application of chromosomal microarray analysis for a cohort of 2600 Chinese patients with miscarriage
Received date: 2018-06-29
Revised date: 2018-08-03
Online published: 2018-08-03
Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is a technique for screening numerical and structural abnormalities of chromosomes at the whole genome level. It is a routine tool for pediatric and prenatal genetic diagnoses. It has also been applied to investigate the genetic etiologies of miscarriages. In our study, we used the CMA technology to analyze the chromosomal variations of fetuses from miscarriages at the whole genome level, and to evaluate its clinical applications in studies of miscarriages. The CMA analyses were performed on 2600 miscarriage specimens, of which 2505 specimens (96.35%) were successfully analyzed. Among them, 1021 specimens were analyzed with CytoScan Optima chip; 1211 specimens were analyzed with CytoScan 750K chip; and 273 cases were analyzed with CytoScan HD chip. Chromosomal abnormalities were identified in 967 specimens (38.6%) by these 3 kinds of chips, of which 506 specimens (50.00%) were detected with CytoScan Optima chip; 388 specimens were detected by CytoScan 750K chip (32.00%); and 73 cases (26.74%) were detected in CytoScan HD chip. Among the 967 cases of chromosomal abnormalities, 801 cases (82.83%) were numerical chromosomal abnormalities; 94 cases (9.72%) were structural abnormalities; 56 cases (5.79%) were mosaicisms; and 16 (1.65%) were regions of homozygosity. Our research suggests that CMA is a reliable, robust, and high-resolution technology for genetic diagnosis of miscarriage in clinical practice, which can also provide results as guidance for the risk assessment of assisted fertility.
Peng Jiping, Yuan Haiming . Application of chromosomal microarray analysis for a cohort of 2600 Chinese patients with miscarriage[J]. Hereditas(Beijing), 2018 , 40(9) : 779 -788 . DOI: 10.16288/j.yczz.18-120
| [1] | Muttukrishna S, Jauniaux E, Greenwold N, McGarrigle H, Jivraj S, Carter S, Elgaddal S, Groome N, Regan L . Circulating levels of inhibin A, activin A and follistatin in missed and recurrent miscarriages. Hum Reprod, 2002,17(12):3072-3078. | |||
| [2] | van den Berg MM, van Maarle MC, van Wely M, Goddijn M . Genetics of early miscarriage. Biochim Biophys Acta, 2012,1822(12):1951-1959. | |||
| [3] | Rai R, Regan L . Recurrent miscarriage. Lancet, 2006,368(9535):601-611. | |||
| [4] | Goddijn M, Leschot NJ . Genetic aspects of miscarriage. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2000,14(5):855-865. | |||
| [5] | Meng JL . Application of chromosome microarray analysis in the diagnosis of prenatal genetic diseases. Prog Obstetr Gynecol, 2015,24(5):390-393. | |||
| [5] | 孟金来 . 染色体微阵列分析技术在产前遗传性疾病诊断中的应用进展. 现代妇产科进展, 2015,24(5):390-393. | |||
| [6] | Wang Y, Cheng Q, Meng L, Luo C, Hu H, Zhang J, Cheng J, Xu T, Jiang T, Liang D, Hu P, Xu Z . Clinical application of SNP array analysis in first-trimester pregnancy loss: a prospective study. Clin Genet, 2017,91(6):849-858. | |||
| [7] | Shearer BM, Thorland EC, Carlson AW, Jalal SM, Ketterling RP . Reflex fluorescent in situ hybridization testing for unsuccessful product of conception cultures: a retrospective analysis of 5555 samples attempted by conventional cytogenetics and fluorescent in situ hybridization. Genet Med, 2011,13(6):545-552. | |||
| [8] | Haoud K, Mellali S, Gouas L, Tchirkov A, Vago P, Moulessehoul S . Prevalence of aneuploidies in products of spontaneous abortion: interest of FISH and MLPA. Morphologie, 2014,98(320):40-46. | |||
| [9] | Warren JE, Turok DK, Maxwell TM, Brothman AR, Silver RM . Array comparative genomic hybridization for genetic evaluation of fetal loss between 10 and 20 weeks of gestation. Obstet Gynecol, 2009,114(5):1093-1102. | |||
| [10] | Dhillon RK, Hillman SC, Morris RK, McMullan D, Williams D, Coomarasamy A, Kilby MD . Additional information from chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) over conventional karyotyping when diagnosing chromosomal abnormalities in miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG, 2014,121(1):11-21. | |||
| [11] | Reddy UM, Page GP, Saade GR, Silver RM, Thorsten VR, Parker CB, Pinar H, Willinger M, Stoll BJ, Heim-Hall J, Varner MW, Goldenberg RL, Bukowski R, Wapner RJ, Drews-Botsch CD, O'Brien BM, Dudley DJ, Levy B, NICHD Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network . Karyotype versus microarray testing for genetic abnormalities after stillbirth. N Engl J Med, 2012,367(23):2185-2193. | |||
| [12] | Gao J, Liu C, Yao F, Hao N, Zhou J, Zhou Q, Zhang L, Liu X, Bian X, Liu J . Array-based comparative genomic hybridization is more informative than conventional karyotyping and fluorescence in situ hybridization in the analysis of first-trimester spontaneous abortion. Mol Cytoge
/
|