一种改进的多学习教与学优化算法

针对传统教与学算法在解决复杂多峰函数优化问题时,具有局部最优且搜索开发能力较差的缺点,提出了一种改进的多学习教与学优化算法,新算法为学员的每一维加入不同的教学因子,设计了基于学员均值比较的教师选择策略和向教师及学员学习的多学习策略。基于多个单峰和多峰函数的仿真结果表明,新算法跟传统的、改进的教与学算法相比,在稳定性、寻优精度和收敛速度方面更具优势。     

Diagnostic yield of exome sequencing in isolated fetal growth restriction: Systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield of exome sequencing (ES) above that of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) or karyotyping in fetuses with isolated fetal growth restriction (FGR). This was a systematic review conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Selected studies included those with (a) only fetuses with FGR in the absence of fetal structural anomalies and (b) negative CMA or karyotyping results. Only positive variants classified as likely pathogenic or pathogenic determined as causative of the fetal phenotype were considered. A negative CMA or karyotype result was treated as the reference standard. Eight studies with data on ES diagnostic yield, including 146 fetuses with isolated FGR, were identified. Overall, a pathogenic variant determined as potentially causative of the fetal phenotype was found in 17 cases, resulting in a 12% (95% CI: 7%–18%) incremental performance pool of ES. The vast majority were studied before 32 weeks'gestation. In conclusion, a monogenic disorder was prenatally found in association with apparently isolated FGR in 12% of these fetuses.     

Rapid whole exome sequencing in pregnancies to identify the underlying genetic cause in fetuses with congenital anomalies detected by ultrasound imaging

Objective

The purpose of this study was to explore the diagnostic yield and clinical utility of trio-based rapid whole exome sequencing (rWES) in pregnancies of fetuses with a wide range of congenital anomalies detected by ultrasound imaging.

Methods

In this observational study, we analyzed the first 54 cases referred to our laboratory for prenatal rWES to support clinical decision making, after the sonographic detection of fetal congenital anomalies. The most common identified congenital anomalies were skeletal dysplasia (n = 20), multiple major fetal congenital anomalies (n = 17) and intracerebral structural anomalies (n = 7).

Results

A conclusive diagnosis was identified in 18 of the 54 cases (33%). Pathogenic variants were detected most often in fetuses with skeletal dysplasia (n = 11) followed by fetuses with multiple major fetal congenital anomalies (n = 4) and intracerebral structural anomalies (n = 3). A survey, completed by the physicians for 37 of 54 cases, indicated that the rWES results impacted clinical decision making in 68% of cases.

Conclusions

These results suggest that rWES improves prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with congenital anomalies, and has an important impact on prenatal and peripartum parental and clinical decision making.     

Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: The 59 genes ACMG recommends reporting as secondary findings when sequencing postnatally should be reported when detected on fetal (and parental) sequencing

Genome sequencing is increasingly being used to aid genetic diagnosis in fetuses with structural abnormalities detected on ultrasound examination. However, with clinical exome and genome sequencing, there is potential for the recognition and reporting of incidental or secondary findings unrelated to the indication for ordering the sequencing, but of potential medical value for patient care. In the postnatal setting, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) has clear guidelines that state that when offering sequencing, secondary findings should be reported in 59 genes for which ACMG consider there is a clinical evidence that pathogenic variants may result in disease that might be prevented or treated, with the option to opt out of receiving this information. However, these guidelines specifically exclude prenatal sequencing. Here, we report the debate on whether or not pathogenic findings in these 59 genes should or should not be reported in the prenatal setting. Although more were in favour of reporting before the debate, there was no significant consensus from the audience. After the debate there was a swing toward not reporting, but a slim majority (55%) remained in favour, indicating that this is an area requiring further research and the development of evidence-based guidelines applicable to prenatal proband and trio sequencing.