排序方式: 共有1条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
Lotte Hatt Katarina Ravn Line Dahl Jeppesen Bolette Hestbek Nicolaisen Inga Baasch Christensen Ripudaman Singh Palle Schelde Simon Horsholt Thomsen Rikke Christensen Marianne Sinding Laura Vase Marianne Oestergaard Marie Bender Ruggard Hanne S. Jensen Helle Mogensen Niels Uldbjerg Naja Becher Sara Markholt Puk Sandager Lars Henning Pedersen Ida Vogel 《黑龙江环境通报》2023,43(7):854-864
Objectives
We aimed to compare cell-based NIPT (cbNIPT) to chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and to examine the test characteristics of cbNIPT in the first clinical validation study of cbNIPT compared to cell-free NIPT (cfNIPT).Material and Methods
Study 1: Women (N = 92) who accepted CVS were recruited for cbNIPT (53 normal and 39 abnormal). Samples were analyzed with chromosomal microarray (CMA). Study 2: Women (N = 282) who accepted cfNIPT were recruited for cbNIPT. cfNIPT was analyzed using sequencing and cbNIPT by CMA.Results
Study 1: cbNIPT detected all aberrations (32/32) found in CVS: trisomies 13, 18 and 21 (23/23), pathogenic copy number variations (CNVs) (6/6) and sex chromosome aberrations (3/3). cbNIPT detected 3/8 cases of mosaicism in the placenta. Study 2: cbNIPT detected all trisomies found with cfNIPT (6/6) and had no false positive (0/246). One of the three CNVs called by cbNIPT was confirmed by CVS but was undetected by cfNIPT, two were false positives. cbNIPT detected mosaicism in five samples, of which two were not detected by cfNIPT. cbNIPT failed in 7.8% compared to 2.8% in cfNIPT.Conclusion
Circulating trophoblasts in the maternal circulation provide the potential of screening for aneuploidies and pathogenic CNVs covering the entire fetal genome. 相似文献
1