4.2 Article

Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of common fetal chromosomal aneuploidies by maternal plasma DNA sequencing

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 1370-1374

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2011.635730

关键词

fetal aneuploidy; first trimester; massively parallel sequencing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To develop a new bioinformatic method in the noninvasive prenatal identification of common fetal aneuploidies using massively parallel sequencing on maternal plasma. Methods: Massively parallel sequencing was performed on plasma DNA samples from 108 pregnant women (median gestation: 12(+5) week) immediately before chorionic villus sampling (CVS) or amniocentesis. Data were analysed using a novel z-score method with internal reference chromosome. The diagnostic accuracies of the fetal karyotyping status were compared against two previously reported z-score methods - one without adjustment and the other with GC correction. Results: A total of 32 cases with fetal aneuploidy were confirmed by conventional karyotyping, including 11 cases of Trisomy 21, 10 cases of Trisomy 18, 2 cases of Trisomy 13, 8 cases of Turner syndrome (45, XO) and one case of Klinefelter syndrome (47, XXY). Using the z-score method without reference adjustment, the detection rate for Trisomy 21, Trisomy 18, Trisomy 13, Turner syndrome, and Klinefelter's syndrome is 100%, 40%, 0%, 88% and 0% respectively. Using the z-score method with GC correction, the detection rate increased to 100% for Trisomy 21, 90% for Trisomy 18, 100% for Trisomy 13. By using the z-score method with internal reference, the detection rate increased to 100% for all aneuploidies. The false positive rate was 0% for all three methods. Conclusion: This massively parallel sequencing-based approach, combined with the improved z-score test methodology, enables the prenatal diagnosis of most common aneuploidies with a high degree of accuracy, even in the first trimester of pregnancy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据