Spectrum of Cytogenomic Abnormalities Revealed by Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization on Products of Conception Culture Failure and Normal Karyotype Samples

Qinghua Zhou; Shen-Yin Wu; Katherine Amato; Autumn DiAdamo; Peining Li

doi:10.1016/j.jgg.2016.02.002

Volume 43 Issue 3

Mar. 2016

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of Genetics and Genomics > 2016 > 43(3): 121-131

PDF( 894 KB)

Spectrum of Cytogenomic Abnormalities Revealed by Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization on Products of Conception Culture Failure and Normal Karyotype Samples

doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2016.02.002

a
The First Affiliated Hospital, The Biomedical Translational Research Institute, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
b
Department of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA

More Information

Corresponding author: E-mail address: qinghuazhou@jnu.edu.cn (Qinghua Zhou); E-mail address: peining.li@yale.edu (Peining Li)
Received Date: 2015-10-26
Accepted Date: 2016-02-07
Rev Recd Date: 2016-02-04

Available Online: 2016-02-13

Publish Date: 2016-03-20

Abstract

Abstract

Approximately 30% of pregnancies after implantation end up in spontaneous abortions, and 50% of them are caused by chromosomal abnormalities. However, the spectrum of genomic copy number variants (CNVs) in products of conception (POC) and the underlying gene-dosage-sensitive mechanisms causing spontaneous abortions remain largely unknown. In this study, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) analysis was performed as a salvage procedure for 128 POC culture failure (POC-CF) samples and as a supplemental procedure for 106 POC normal karyotype (POC-NK) samples. Chromosomal abnormalities were detected in 10% of POC-CF and pathogenic CNVs were detected in 3.9% of POC-CF and 5.7% of POC-NK samples. Compiled results from this study and relevant case series through a literature review demonstrated an abnormality detection rate (ADR) of 35% for chromosomal abnormalities in POC-CF samples, 3.7% for pathogenic CNVs in POC-CF samples, and 4.6% for pathogenic CNVs in POC-NK samples. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) was performed on the genes from pathogenic CNVs found in POC samples. The denoted primary gene networks suggested that apoptosis and cell proliferation pathways are involved in miscarriage. In summary, a similar spectrum of cytogenomic abnormalities was observed in POC culture success and POC-CF samples. A threshold effect correlating the number of dosage-sensitive genes in a chromosome with the observed frequency of autosomal trisomy is proposed. A rationalized approach using firstly fluorescencein situ hybridization (FISH) testing with probes of chromosomes X/Y/18, 13/21, and 15/16/22 for common aneuploidies and polyploidies and secondly aCGH for other cytogenomic abnormalities is recommended for POC-CF samples.
- Products of conception (POC),
- Culture failure,
- Normal karyotype,
- Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH),
- Chromosomal and genomic abnormalities,
- Apoptosis

FullText(HTML)

References(44)

References

[1]	Ayme, S., Lippman-Hand, A. Maternal-age effect in aneuploidy: does altered embryonic selection play a role? Am. J. Hum. Genet., 34 (1982),pp. 558-565
[2]	Benkhalifa, M., Kasakyan, S., Clement, P. et al. Prenat. Diagn., 25 (2005),pp. 894-900
[3]	Bug, S., Solfrank, B., Schmitz, F. et al. Diagnostic utility of novel combined arrays for genome-wide simultaneous detection of aneuploidy and uniparental isodisomy in losses of pregnancy Mol. Cytogenet., 7 (2014),p. 43
[4]	Dória, S., Carvalho, F., Ramalho, C. et al. An efficient protocol for the detection of chromosomal abnormalities in spontaneous miscarriages or foetal deaths Eu. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol., 147 (2009),pp. 144-150
[5]	Evangelidou, P., Sismani, C., Ioannides, M. et al. Clinical application of whole-genome array CGH during prenatal diagnosis: study of 25 selected pregnancies with abnormal ultrasound findings or apparently balanced structural aberrations Mol. Cytogenet., 3 (2010),p. 24
[6]	Fritz, B., Hallermann, C., Olert, J. et al. Cytogenetic analyses of culture failures by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH)-re-evaluation of chromosome aberration rates in early spontaneous abortions Eu. J. Hum. Genet., 9 (2001),pp. 539-547
[7]	Gao, J., Liu, C., Yao, F. et al. Mol. Cytogenet., 5 (2012),p. 33
[8]	Gardo, S. Spontaneous abortion and genetic natural selection Orv. Hetil., 134 (1993),pp. 1459-1464
[9]	Herbert, M., Kalleas, D., Cooney, D. et al. Meiosis and maternal aging: insights from aneuploid oocytes and trisomy births Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol., 7 (2015),p. a017970
[10]	Hook, E.B. Exclusion of chromosomal mosaicism: tables of 90%, 95% and 99% confidence limits and comments on use Am. J. Hum. Genet., 29 (1977),pp. 94-97
[11]	Kooper, A.J., Faas, B.H., Feenstra, I. et al. Best diagnostic approach for the genetic evaluation of fetuses after intrauterine death in first, second or third trimester: QF-PCR, karyotyping and/or genome wide SNP array analysis Mol. Cytogenet., 7 (2014),p. 6
[12]	Kudesia, R., Li, M., Smith, J. et al. Rescue karyotyping: a case series of array- based comparative genomic hybridization evaluation of archival conceptual tissue Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol., 12 (2014),p. 19
[13]	Lebedev, I.N., Ostroverkhova, N.V., Nikitina, T.V. et al. Features of chromosomal abnormalities in spontaneous abortion cell culture failure detected by interphase FISH analysis Eu. J. Hum. Genet., 12 (2004),pp. 513-520
[14]	Li, P., Pomianowski, P., DiMaio, S.M. et al. Genomic characterization of prenatally detected chromosomal structural abnormalities using oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization Am. J. Med. Genet., 155A (2011),pp. 1605-1615
[15]	Manning, M., Hudgins, L., Professional Practice and Guidelines Committee Array-based technology and recommendations for utilization in medical genetics practice for detection of chromosomal abnormalities Genet. Med., 12 (2010),pp. 742-745
[16]	MacLennan, M., Crichton, J.H., Playfoot, C.J. et al. Oocyte development, meiosis and aneuploidy Semin. Cell Dev. Biol., 45 (2015),pp. 68-76
[17]	Menasha, J., Levy, B., Hirschhorn, K. et al. Incidence and spectrum of chromosome abnormalities in spontaneous abortions: new insights from a 12-year study Genet. Med., 7 (2005),pp. 251-263
[18]	Meng, J.-L., Matarese, C., Crivello, J. et al. Changes in and efficacies of indications for invasive prenatal diagnosis of cytogenomic abnormalities: 13 years of experience in a single center Med. Sci. Monit., 21 (2015),pp. 1942-1948
[19]	Menten, B., Swerts, K., Delle Chiaie, B. et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization and flow cytometry analysis of spontaneous abortions and mors in utero samples BMC Med. Genet., 10 (2009),p. 89
[20]	Miller, D.T., Adam, M.P., Aradhya, S. et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies Am. J. Hum. Genet., 86 (2010),pp. 749-764
[21]	Nussbaum, R.L., McInnes, R.R., Willard, H.F. et al.
[22]	Qumsiyeh, M.B., Kim, K.-R., Ahmed, M.N. et al. Cytogenetics and mechanisms of spontaneous abortions: increased apoptosis and decreased cell proliferation in chromosomally abnormal villi Cytogenet. Cell Genet., 88 (2000),pp. 230-235
[23]	Reddy, U.M., Page, G.P., Saade, G.R. et al. Karyotype versus microarray testing for genetic abnormalities after stillbirth N. Engl. J. Med., 367 (2012),pp. 2185-2193
[24]	Risch, N., Stein, Z., Kline, J. et al. The relationship between maternal age and chromosome size in autosomal trisomy Am. J. Hum. Genet., 39 (1986),pp. 68-78
[25]	Robberecht, C., Schuddinck, V., Fryns, J.P. et al. Diagnosis of miscarriages by molecular karyotyping: benefits and pitfalls Genet. Med., 9 (2009),pp. 646-654
[26]	Robberecht, C., Pexsters, A., Deprest, J. et al. Cytogenetic and morphological analysis of early products of conception following hystero-embryoscopy from couples with recurrent pregnancy loss Prenat. Diagn., 32 (2012),pp. 933-942
[27]	Sankaranarayanan, K. The role of non-disjunction in aneuploidy in man an overview Mutat. Res., 61 (1979),pp. 1-28
[28]	Sauer, M.V. Infertility and early pregnancy loss is largely due to oocyte aging, not uterine senescence, as demonstrated by oocyte donation Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., 828 (2006),pp. 166-174
[29]	Schaeffer, A.J., Chung, J., Heretis, K. et al. Comparative genomic hybridization-array analysis enhances the detection of aneuploidies and submicroscopic imbalances in spontaneous miscarriages Am. J. Hum. Genet., 74 (2004),pp. 1168-1174
[30]	Shimokawa, O., Harada, N., Miyake, N. et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis in first-trimester spontaneous abortions with 'normal' karyotypes Am. J. Med. Genet., 140A (2006),pp. 1931-1935
[31]	van den Berg, M.M., van Maarle, M.C., van Wely, M. et al. Genetics of early miscarriage Biochim. Biophys. Acta., 1822 (2012),pp. 1951-1959
[32]	Viaggi, C.D., Cavani, S., Malacarne, M. et al. First-trimester euploid miscarriages analysed by array-CGH J. Appl. Genet., 3 (2013),pp. 353-359
[33]	Wang, B.T., Chong, T.P., Boyar, F.Z. et al. Abnormalities in spontaneous abortions detected by G-banding and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) at a national reference laboratory Mol. Cytogenet., 7 (2014),p. 33
[34]	Wapner, R.J., Martin, C.L., Levy, B. et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis N. Engl. J. Med., 367 (2012),pp. 2175-2184
[35]	Warburton, D. Biological aging and the etiology of aneuploidy Cytogenet. Genome Res., 111 (2005),pp. 266-272
[36]	Warren, J.E., Turok, D.K., Maxwell, T.M. et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization for genetic evaluation of fetal loss between 10 and 20 weeks of gestation Obstet. Gynecol., 114 (2009),pp. 1093-1102
[37]	Wei, Y., Xu, F., Li, P. Technology-driven and evidence-based genomic analysis for integrated pediatric and prenatal genetic evaluation J. Genet. Genomics, 40 (2013),pp. 1-14
[38]	Wilcox, A., Weinberg, C., O'Connor, J. et al. Incidence of early loss of pregnancy N. Engl. J. Med., 319 (1988),pp. 189-194
[39]	Xiang, B., Hemingway, S., Qumsiyeh, M. et al. CytoAccess: a relational laboratory information management system for a clinical cytogenetics laboratory J. Assoc. Genet. Technol., 32 (2006),pp. 168-170
[40]	Xiang, B., Li, A., Valentin, D. et al. Analytical and clinical validity of whole genome oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization for pediatric patients with mental retardation and developmental delay Am. J. Med. Genet., 146A (2008),pp. 1942-1954
[41]	Xiang, B., Zhu, H., Shen, Y. et al. Genome-wide oligonucleotide array CGH for etiological diagnosis of mental retardation: a multi-center experience of 1,499 clinical cases J. Mol. Diagn., 12 (2010),pp. 204-212
[42]	Xu, F., Li, L., Schulz, V.P. et al. Cytogenomic mapping and bioinformatic mining reveal interacting brain expressed genes for intellectural disabilities Mol. Cytogenet., 7 (2014),p. 4
[43]	Xu, Z.Y., Geng, Q., Luo, F.W. et al. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and array comparative genomic hybridization analyses for prenatal diagnosis of cytogenomic abnormalities Mol. Cytogenet., 7 (2014),p. 84
[44]	Zhang, Y.X., Zhang, Y.P., Gu, Y. et al. Genetic analysis of first trismester miscarriage with a combination of cytogenetic karyotyping, miscrosatellite genotyping and array CGH Clin. Genet., 75 (2009),pp. 133-140