Abstract
With the gradual liberalization of the three-child policy and the development of assisted reproductive technology in China, the number of women with high-risk pregnancies is gradually increasing. In this study, 4211 fetuses who underwent chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) with high-risk prenatal indications were analysed. The results showed that the overall prenatal detection rate of CMA was 11.4% (480/4211), with detection rates of 5.82% (245/4211) for abnormal chromosome numbers and 5.58% (235/4211) for copy number variants. Additionally, the detection rates of clinically significant copy number variants were 3.78% (159/4211) and 1.8% (76/4211) for variants of uncertain significance. The detection rates of fetal chromosomal abnormalities were 6.42% (30/467) for pregnant women with advanced maternal age (AMA), 6.01% (50/832) for high-risk maternal serum screening (MSS) results, 39.09% (224/573) with abnormal non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results, 9.21% (127/1379) with abnormal ultrasound results, and 5.1% (49/960) for other indications. Follow-up results were available for 4211 patients, including 3677 (3677/4211, 87.32%) whose infants were normal after birth, 462 (462/4211, 10.97%) who terminated their pregnancy, 51 (51/4211, 1.21%) whose infants were abnormal after birth, and 21 (21/4211, 0.50%) who refused follow-up. The results of this study demonstrate significant variation in the diagnostic rate of chromosomal microarray analysis across different indications, providing valuable guidance for clinicians to assess the applicability of CMA technology in prenatal diagnosis.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
China has a large population and ranks among the countries with a high prevalence of birth defects. In China, there are significant disparities among different geographical regions, with the prevalence of birth defects ranging from 0.715 to 19.184%1,2,3. In addition to traditional chromosomal aneuploidy abnormalities, chromosome microdeletion or microduplication syndromes have emerged as a significant category of birth defects. The diagnostic rate of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for chromosomal abnormalities is higher than that of traditional G-banding karyotype analysis. The prenatal diagnosis of microdeletion and microduplication syndrome through CMA has significant implications for the prevention of birth defects.
The indications for invasive prenatal diagnosis mainly include abnormal ultrasound findings, high-risk maternal serum screening (MSS), abnormal non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results, advanced maternal age (AMA), intrauterine growth restriction, history of adverse pregnancy outcomes, maternal request, in vitro fertilization, drug use or exposure to toxic substances during pregnancy, consanguineous marriage, and parental anxiety. Since 2009, the United States, Europe, Canada, and other developed countries have recommended CMA as the first-tier diagnostic test for fetuses, both for patients with fetal ultrasound anomalies and for patients who choose to undergo prenatal testing despite normal ultrasound of the fetus4,5,6. To date, many studies evaluating the performance of CMA in prenatal diagnosis have been published7,8,9. The incidence of pathogenic CNVs in fetuses with abnormal ultrasound results can be further classified based on the specific organ system involved and the number of observed abnormalities. The most frequently affected organ systems related to abnormal CMA results are the cardiovascular system, skeletal system, genitourinary system and central nervous system10,11,19,20,21, and the findings of our study (3.78%) fell within this range. In the AMA-only group, the abnormal MSS results group, and the abnormal NIPT results group, the detection rates of CNVs (P/LP) by CMA were 2.35%, 2.52%, and 8.55%, respectively. These results were consistent with previously reported detection rates in the literature ranging from 0.84% to 5.8%, 1.6% to 8.0%, and 0.76% to 35.3%, respectively16,19,20,21,22. However, in the group with abnormal ultrasound results, the detection rate of CNVs (P/LP) by CMA was 3.55%, which was lower than that reported in previous studies (4.5–7.9%)16,19,21, particularly within the subgroup of single-system structural abnormalities (3.35% vs. 3.66–10.9%)23. The presence of clinically significant CNVs may be observed when prenatal ultrasound indicates thickened nuchal translucency or enhanced renal echo. Fetuses with ultrasound soft marker abnormalities exhibited varying incidence rates of CNVs (P/LP). Our research revealed a small but not statistically significant increase in the likelihood of clinically relevant CNVs in fetuses with one or more ultrasound soft markers (3.1% vs. 4.29%, p = 0.853), consistent with previous investigations24. These findings suggested that CMA should be performed in pregnant women when two or more ultrasound soft markers are detected by ultrasound.
Among the subgroup of fetuses with ultrasound structural abnormalities, the detection rate of CNVs (P/LP) was the highest in the group of fetuses with structural anomalies combined with soft marker abnormalities (8.2%), followed by those with multiple system structural abnormalities (7.41%). The detection rate of CNVs (P/LP) in fetuses with a single-system malformation is similar to that previously reported (3.1–7.9%)25, with skeletal (9.52%), genitourinary (2.2%), central nervous (9.09%) and cardiovascular system abnormalities (3.43%) being the most commonly associated with CNVs (P/LP). These results showed that CMA should be recommended when fetal ultrasound reveals multiple structural abnormalities, especially in skeletal, genitourinary, central nervous, and cardiovascular system abnormalities. In this study, Two fetuses with Emanuel syndrome were identified, and CMA results showed 11q23.3q25 region duplication and 22q11.1q11.21 region duplication. Prenatal ultrasound revealed a single umbilical cord and underdeveloped cerebellar vermis in one fetus, while the other exhibited a posterior fossa anomaly. These are the most common defects of ES and might be diagnosed in early pregnancy26. The clinical phenotype of the 22q11.2 proximal deletion exhibits significant heterogeneity, primarily including heart defects, palatal abnormalities, developmental retardation, and immunodeficiency. In this study, Two fetuses with a 22q11.2 proximal deletion had cardiac defects: one exhibited right foot varus and left ventricular punctate strong echoes, and the other presented with a right aortic arch. 22q11.2 deletion is frequently observed in fetuses with heart defects diagnosed prenatally27. Therefore, CMA can be used as a detection method for prenatal echocardiography abnormalities.
The phenotype resulting from a susceptibility CNV is unpredictable due to incomplete penetrance and variable expressivity28,29. These features have not been systematically described although the clinical phenotypic features associated with postnatal recurrent microdeletion/duplication syndromes are well-defined, these features have not been systematically described in prenatal cases due to the limitations of prenatal identification. In our study, the most common recurrent microdeletion/duplication syndromes were 1q21.1 deletion syndrome (10 fetuses) and 15q11.2 deletion syndrome (10 fetuses). 22q11.2 duplication syndrome (9 fetuses), 16p13.11 duplication syndrome (9 fetuses), proximal 16p12.2 microdeletion syndrome (7 fetuses), 16p11.2 microdeletion syndrome (4 fetuses), and 16p11.2 duplication syndrome (3 fetuses), 16p13.11 deletion syndrome (2 fetuses) were also common in this study. Among these fetuses, only 7 (7/54, 12.2%) exhibited structural abnormalities and all pregnancies were terminated. Moreover, we observed that the proportion of normal fetuses after birth is greater in recurrent microdeletion/duplication syndromes with penetrance of less than 10%. For example, approximately 90% of fetuses with 15q11.2 deletion syndrome and 16p13.11 duplication syndrome have a normal outcome. Therefore, we recommend not informing couples about CNVs classified as loci with penetrance of less than 10%. These potential neurodevelopmental sites may have some structural abnormalities and may not have obvious clinical indications during pregnancy, which will increase parents' anxiety about fetal development. The precise ultimate phenotype remains unknown, posing significant challenges for genetic counseling.
The single nucleotide polymorphism array (SNP array) technology of CMA can detect not only CNVs, but also ROH, uniparental disomy (UPD), and low-level mosaics30.As chromosomes 6,7,11,14,15 and 20 are known to be associated with parental-specific expression genes, further testing is necessary to clarify the diagnosis and distinguish between ROH and UPD. In clinical practice, child-parent trio analysis through CMA is often required31. This study reported two cases of fragmented ROH involving the long arm of chromosome 15. Due to AMA and the absence of future childbearing plans, both couples abandoned further diagnostic tests and terminated their pregnancies, so we could not determine the pathogenicity of fragmented ROH involving the long arm of chromosome 15. A case of fragmented ROH on the short arm of chromosome 5 was reported. The karyotype of this fetus was 46, XY, del(5)(p13)[32]/46, XY[70], which led to mosaic loss in the critical region causing Cri du chat syndrome. Consequently, the couple decided to induce labor. When a critical region causing microdeletion syndrome exhibits ROH, it is imperative to complement this region with karyoty** analysis to ascertain its pathogenicity. The presence of multiple large regions of ROH on various chromosomes may indicate a potential consanguineous relationship between the tested individual's parents, either close or distant32. In this study, one fetus was found to have multiple large regions of ROH on various chromosomes due to consanguineous marriage between the parents. The couple ultimately decided to terminate the pregnancy. The presence of ROH on the whole of chromosome 4 was identified in our study. In the advanced stages of gestation, intrauterine growth restriction led to fetal demise within the uterus. This finding was consistent with previous studies that fetuses with ROH frequently exhibited the most prevalent prenatal manifestation of intrauterine growth restriction33. For 6 fetuses involving other chromosome fragmentary ROH regions, all six couples opted to continue their pregnancies, and subsequent assessments confirmed normal fetal development postpartum. Due to the complex pathogenesis of ROH, encompassing gene imprinting effects, homozygous recessive gene mutations, and low-level chromosomal mosaics, a comprehensive assessment of prognosis should be conducted by combining ultrasound findings, family verification, whole exome sequencing, and other relevant factors.
The pregnancy outcomes of all women were evaluated in this study. Although the majority of women with fetuses diagnosed with aneuploidy or CNV(P/LP) opted for pregnancy termination, 70 women whose fetuses with aneuploidy or CNVs (P/LP) decided to continue their pregnancy, and subsequent follow-up revealed that 65 of the newborns exhibited normal phenotypes. Notably, among these patients, 50% had fetuses with sex chromosome aneuploidy. The results of our investigation indicated that an increasing number of people are accepting of children with sex chromosome aneuploidy. In this study, 76 fetuses with CNVs (VUS) were found, for a detection rate of 1.85%. After follow-up, a total of 45 fetuses were delivered, and among these fetuses, 44 exhibited normal postnatal outcomes. This finding indicates that fetuses with CNVs (VUS) are most likely to have a good pregnancy outcome. Furthermore, reporting VUS in prenatal diagnosis may present challenges for genetic counseling, place pressure on pregnant women and their families, and lead to excessive termination of pregnancy. Therefore, in subsequent stages, further case accumulation and long-term follow-up are needed to comprehensively evaluate the prognosis. This study has significant implications for the development of future genetic counseling guidelines.
Due to the limited availability of detailed genotype–phenotype information for some fetuses, this retrospective study is limited in terms of data acquisition. For instance, some pregnant women have poor compliance or refuse to undergo testing due to financial constraints, while others may experience information loss during the referral process, resulting in the potential omission of high-risk indications for certain fetuses and ultimately introducing bias into the study findings. Furthermore, incomplete clinical examinations in fetuses with a young gestational age may lead to insufficient descriptions of certain clinical phenotypes. Ultimately, the absence of parental data presents a significant challenge in assessing the pathogenicity of certain CNVs, thereby complicating our clinical genetic counseling efforts.
The CMA test is applicable for all prenatal clinical indications because it enhances the detection of clinically significant CNVs. Clinicians should duly apprise pregnant women about the potential risk of undetectable CNVs through biochemical screening or most existing NIPT platforms, and emphasize the value of CMA in prenatal diagnosis for informed decision-making.
Materials and methods
Patients and clinical indications
All patients who underwent invasive prenatal diagnosis by CMA at Linyi Women and Children's Hospital between 2016 and 2022 in Shandong, China. Clinical samples (chorionic villi and amniotic fluid) were obtained by ultrasound-guided abdominal chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis. After receiving detailed genetic counseling before testing, each participant signed a written informed consent form. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Linyi Maternal and Child Hospital (No. KYL-YXLL-2022017). The research was conducted in accordance with the relevant guidelines and clinical norms.
CMA analysis
Fetal uncultured genomic DNA was extracted by a DNA extraction kit (TIANamp Micro DNA Kit, China). The whole genome CytoScan 750 K array (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) was used for CMA according to the manufacturer's instructions. The original data were analyzed by chromosome analysis software 4.2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) of genome version GRCh37/hg19. The results were classified according to genetic mode (familial or de novo), CNV length, genes involved, their classification, and literature information. The online databases consulted included PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed), Decipher (https://www.deciphergenomics.org/), UCSC (https://genome.ucsc.edu/index.html), ClinGen (https://search.clinicalgenome.org/), Clinvar (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/), HGMD (https://www.hgmd.cf.ac.uk/ac/index.php) and DGV (http://dgv.tcag.ca/dgv/app/home). The results were classified as pathogenic (P), likely pathogenic (LP), variant of uncertain significance (VUS) and normal (including likely benign and benign) according to the 2019 ACMG guidelines. Benign (common polymorphism) and/or likely benign CNVs were detected, and the reported results were normal. Regions of homozygosity (ROH) involving chr 6, chr 7, chr 11, chr 14, chr 15, chr 20 with 5 Mb (at the end of the chromosome) or 10 Mb (not at the end of the chromosome) on one of the chromosomes were also reported, while no ROH was detected on the other chromosomes14,15.
Statistical analysis
SPSS 21.0 (Chicago, USA) was used for the statistical analysis. Classified variables are expressed as numbers and percentages, and the chi-square test was used for comparisons. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Linear regression models with gamma values were used to assess the changes in abnormal rates in different age groups.
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Peng, Z. et al. Epidemiology of birth defects based on a birth defects surveillance system in southwestern China and the associated risk factors. Front. Pediatr. 11, 1165477 (2023).
Wang, Q. Q., He, C. Y., Mei, J. & Xu, Y. L. Epidemiology of birth defects in Eastern China and the associated risk factors. Med. Sci. Monit. 28, e933782 (2022).
Wei, W. et al. Analyzing the trends and causes of birth defects—**an City, Shandong Province, China, 2005–2022. China CDC Wkly. 5, 978–983 (2023).
Committee on Genetics and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Committee Opinion No. 682: Microarrays and next-generation sequencing technology: The use of advanced genetic diagnostic tools in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet. Gynecol. 128, e262–e268 (2016).
Hay, S. B. et al. ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyoty** really sufficient?. Prenat. Diagn. 38, 184–189 (2018).
Armour, C. M. et al. Practice guideline: Joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada. J. Med. Genet. 55, 215–221 (2018).
Ganapathi, M., Nahum, O. & Levy, B. Prenatal diagnosis using chromosomal SNP microarrays. Methods Mol. Biol. 1885, 187–205 (2019).
Cheng, S. S. W. et al. Experience of chromosomal microarray applied in prenatal and postnatal settings in Hong Kong. Am. J. Med. Genet. C Semin. Med. Genet. 181, 196–207 (2019).
Srebniak, M. I. et al. Prenatal SNP array testing in 1000 fetuses with ultrasound anomalies: Causative, unexpected and susceptibility CNVs. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 645–651 (2016).
Zhang, Z. et al. Pregnancy outcomes of fetuses with congenital heart disease after a prenatal diagnosis with chromosome microarray. Prenat. Diagn. 42, 79–86 (2022).
Huang, R. et al. Prenatal diagnosis in the fetal hyperechogenic kidneys: Assessment using chromosomal microarray analysis and exome sequencing. Hum. Genet. 142, 835–847 (2023).
**e, X. et al. Application of single nucleotide polymorphism microarray in prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with central nervous system abnormalities. Int. J. Gen. Med. 14, 4239–4246 (2021).
Donnelly, J. C. et al. Association of copy number variants with specific ultrasonographically detected fetal anomalies. Obstet. Gynecol. 124, 83–90 (2014).
Prenatal Screening And Diagnosis Group Birth Defect Prevention And Control Professional Committee Chinese Preventive Medical Association, Prenatal Diagnosis Group Society Of Medical Genetics Chinese Medical Association, Liu, J. Guidelines for the application of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis (2023). Zhonghua Yi Xue Yi Chuan Xue Za Zhi. 40, 1051–1061 (2023).
Hoppman, N., Rumilla, K., Lauer, E., Kearney, H. & Thorland, E. Patterns of homozygosity in patients with uniparental disomy: Detection rate and suggested reporting thresholds for SNP microarrays. Genet. Med. 20, 1522–1527 (2018).
Kowalczyk, K. et al. Comparative genomic hybridization to microarrays in fetuses with high-risk prenatal indications: Polish experience with 7400 pregnancies. Genes (Basel). 13, 690 (2022).
**ang, J. et al. Clinical utility of SNP array analysis in prenatal diagnosis: A cohort study of 5000 pregnancies. Front. Genet. 11, 571219 (2020).
Sagi-Dain, L. et al. Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: Analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies. Genet. Med. 21, 2462–2467 (2019).
Wapner, R. J. et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyoty** for prenatal diagnosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 2175–2184 (2012).
Wang, J. et al. Prospective chromosome analysis of 3429 amniocentesis samples in China using copy number variation sequencing. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 219(287), e1-287.e18 (2018).
Cai, M. et al. Using single nucleotide polymorphism array for prenatal diagnosis in a large multicenter study in Southern China. Sci. Rep. 13, 7242 (2023).
Mastromoro, G. et al. Molecular approaches in fetal malformations, dynamic anomalies and soft markers: Diagnostic rates and challenges-systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel). 12, 575 (2022).
Zhou, C. X. et al. Prenatal features of 17q12 microdeletion and microduplication syndromes: A retrospective case series. Taiwan J. Obstet. Gynecol. 60, 232–237 (2021).
Cai, M. et al. Evaluation of chromosomal abnormalities and copy number variations in fetuses with ultrasonic soft markers. BMC Med. Genom. 14, 19 (2021).
De Wit, M. C. et al. Additional value of prenatal genomic array testing in fetuses with isolated structural ultrasound abnormalities and a normal karyotype: A systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 43, 139–146 (2014).
Piwowarczyk, P. et al. Prenatal diagnosis of Emanuel syndrome—Case series and review of the literature. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 42, 2615–2620 (2022).
Xue, J. et al. 22q11.2 recurrent copy number variation-related syndrome: A retrospective analysis of our own microarray cohort and a systematic clinical overview of ClinGen curation. Transl. Pediatr. 10, 3273–3281 (2021).
Kirov, G. et al. The penetrance of copy number variations for schizophrenia and developmental delay. Biol. Psychiatry. 75, 378–385 (2014).
Rosenfeld, J. A., Coe, B. P., Eichler, E. E., Cuckle, H. & Shaffer, L. G. Estimates of penetrance for recurrent pathogenic copy-number variations. Genet. Med. 15, 478–481 (2013).
Sahoo, T. et al. Comprehensive genetic analysis of pregnancy loss by chromosomal microarrays: Outcomes, benefits, and challenges. Genet. Med. 19, 83–89 (2017).
Gonzales, P. R. et al. Interpretation and reporting of large regions of homozygosity and suspected consanguinity/uniparental disomy, 2021 revision: A technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet. Med. 24, 255–261 (2022).
Kirin, M. et al. Genomic runs of homozygosity record population history and consanguinity. PLoS One. 5, e13996 (2010).
Xue, H. et al. Genetic testing for fetal loss of heterozygosity using single nucleotide polymorphism array and whole-exome sequencing. Sci. Rep. 14, 2190 (2024).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Key Research & Development Program of Liyin, China (2022YX0111)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
H.F.L. performed the experiments, analysed data, and co-wrote the manuscript. J.H. performed the clinical diagnoses for samples’ recruitment, and analysed data. J.G.Q. and L.Z. performed the experiments. Q.Y.W. supervised the project, performed the clinical diagnoses for samples’ recruitment. J.P.Z. supervised the project, designed the study, obtained funding, analysed data, and co-wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Li, H., Hu, J., Wu, Q. et al. Chromosomal abnormalities detected by chromosomal microarray analysis and pregnancy outcomes of 4211 fetuses with high-risk prenatal indications. Sci Rep 14, 15920 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-67123-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-67123-5
- Springer Nature Limited