European collaborative study on prenatal diagnosis: Mosaicism,pseudomosaicism and single abnormal cells in amniotic fluid cell cultures

A report is given of the results of a European collaborative study on mosaicism, pseudomosaicism and single abnormal cells in amniotic fluid cell cultures. The mean frequency of cases with mosaicism was 0.10 per cent, with pseudomosaicism 0.64 per cent and with single abnormal cells 2.83 per cent in a series of 44 170 amniotic fluid samples. There was no significant difference between the colony (in situ) and the flask method with regard to the frequency of mosaicism. Pseudomosaicism and single abnormal cells were more frequent in cases studied with the flask method probably due to other factors than the method of cultivation of the cells. The frequency of maternal cell contamination was 0.17 per cent and the frequency of wrong sex assignment was 0.11 per cent. A more correct estimation is obtained if these frequencies are doubled. There was a considerable variation between laboratories with regard to the frequencies given above. One reason for this variation is that there are no sharp limits between mosaicism, pseudomosaicism and single abnormal cells. Thus the material contained cases diagnosed as having pseudomosaicism which turned out to be mosaics at birth and to have an abnormal phenotype. These cases were very rare but pose a definite problem in prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis.     

Prenatal diagnosis of chromosome mosaicism

The frequency of mosaicism and pseudomosaicism in the prenatal diagnosis of cytogenetic disorders is reported, based on 3000 pregnancies studied in our laboratory. Diagnosis of true mosaicism was only made when an abnomality was detected in two or more independent cultures established from an amniotic fluid sample. On this basis, 0.37 per cent of all cases were diagnosed as true mosaics. 1.07 per cent of all cases had pseudomosaicism involving more than one cell from the same culture with an identical abnormality. 4.13 per cent of cases had a single abnormal cell with an extra chromosome, loss of a sex chromosome (or part of a sex chromosome), or translocation. Details of the outcome and follow-up of cases is given. Particularly problematical were cases where multiple cells from one culture contained an abnormality which could have been clinically significant. A crude estimate of the extent to which true mosaicism might currently be misinterpreted as pseudomosaicism or entirely missed has been made, based on data from the U.S. survey (Hsu and Perlis, in press). It was concluded that even when two, and if necessary a third culture is extensively analysed with an average of 24 cells per culture counted, at least 4.5 per cent of cases of true mosaicism may be completely missed and at least 7 per cent could be misdiagnosed as pseudomosaicism. There is an urgent need for improved laboratory techniques which allow growth of a greater number of cell colonies and therefore a more broadly based analysis. Detailed long term follow-up of prenatally diagnosed mosaics is also essential for assessing the clinical significance of the laboratory findings.     

A canadian collaborative study of mosaicism in amniotic fluid cell cultures

Data on chromosomal mosaicism was collected retrospectively on 12 386 amniotic fluid samples cultured over a 10 year period in 14 Canadian centres. Level I mosaicism (a single abnormal cell—excluding single cell monosomy) was encountered in 863 cases (7.1 per cent). Level II mosaicism (multiple cells with the same abnormality in a single flask or colony) was encountered in 138 cases (1.1 per cent). Level III mosaicism (multiple cells distributed over multiple flasks or colonies) was encountered in 34 cases (0.3 per cent). Analysis of the details of these cases allowed five major conclusions to be drawn: (1) Single cell abnormalities should not be taken as an indication of true fetal mosaicism. Only rarely will this interpretation prove to be incorrect. (2) Mosaicism involving multiple cells confined to a single flask should not be regarded as an indication of true fetal mosaicism. Only occasionally will this interpretation prove to be incorrect. (3) Mosaicism involving multiple cells distributed over more than one flask should be regarded as a strong indication of true fetal mosaicism. Sixty per cent will be confirmed by karyotype analysis of the fetus or infant. (4) Mosaicism of the XX/XY type is usually due to maternal cell contamination. Occasionally it can be a female fetus with XY cells from an unknown source. (5) The in situ or colony method of chromosome analysis has no clear advantage over the flask method for either the detection of true fetal mosaicism or for the ability to distinguish true mosaics from false positives.     

Trisomy 20 mosaicism in prenatal diagnosis–a review and update

A total of 66 cases with prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 20 mosaicism was reviewed. Since the majority of cases (85 per cent) was associated with grossly normal phenotype and the abnormalities noted in 15 per cent of cases were inconsistent and rather non-specific, no causal relationship between trisomy 20 mosaicism and a specific malformation syndrome can be established. The possiblity of an association between an abnormal phenotype and a high percentage of trisomy 20 cells (> 60 per cent) must be considered preliminary and be viewed with caution. The fact that cells with trisomy 20 have not been recovered from blood cultures and were detected more frequently from specific fetal tissues, (such as kidney, rectum, oesophagus), and from placental tissues, suggests that trisomy 20 is more likely to be confined to certain fetal organs and to extra-embryonic tissues. This review calls for the collection of more data on all cases of trisomy 20 mosaicism diagnosed prenatally, in order to provide more accurate information to the prospective parents.     

Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH): A new application in the delineation of true vs. pseudomosaicism in prenatal diagnosis

Metaphase chromosomes and interphase nuclei from nine amniotic fluid cultures were studied with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). The samples were initially analyzed with routine G-banding and were diagnosed as having true mosaicism (five patients) or pseudomosaicism (four patients). In our study, FISH analysis could provide additional information to distinguish pseudo– from true mosaicism by allowing interphase studies and analysis of an increased number of metaphase spreads. These results suggest a multilinear origin of ‘in situ’ colonies of cells.     

A revisit of trisomy 20 mosaicism in prenatal diagnosis—an overview of 103 cases

One hundred and three cases with prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 20 mosaicism through amniocentesis were reviewed. Approximately 90 per cent (90/101) of the cases were associated with grossly normal phenotype. It is likely that, in the majority of cases, cells with trisomy 20 were extraembryonic in origin or largely confined to the placenta. However, in some cases, the cells with trisomy 20 were confined to certain specific fetal organs or tissues such as kidney, skin, etc. Cytogenetic follow-up studies in liveborns should include a culture from urine sediment.     

Prenatal detection of chromosomal mosaicism

A significant problem associated with cytogenetic prenatal diagnosis is distinguishing between true and pseudomosaicism. This becomes a diagnostic dilemma when fetal mosaicism corresponds with a known clinical entity. True mosaicism reportedly occurs with a frequency of 0·2 per cent and pseudomosaicism in 0·7 per cent to 2·7 per cent of cases. In the past 12 months, our laboratory has completed 522 fetal karyotypes. Nine cases were found to demonstrate mosaicism, 4 true mosaics (0·8 per cent) and 6 pseudomosaics (1·1 per cent). One case demonstrated both true and pseudomosaicism. In all cases of true mosaicism, the pregnancy was continued and karyotypes completed at birth. Our results demonstrate a danger of rigid adherence to the criteria for true and pseudomosaicism in the examination of amniotic fluids. It is suggested that the criteria established for true and pseudomosaicism may not be valid when an aberrant cell line is found in a single flask and when that aberrant cell line is compatible with a known clinical entity due to a chromosome anomaly.     

Trisomy 12 mosaicism in phenotypically normal fetuses following prenatal detection

We report three cases of amniocentesis in which mosaicism for trisomy 12 was detected in two or more independent cultures. The parents elected to terminate the pregnancy in all three cases. Follow-up studies in two of the cases confirmed the mosaicism in fetal tissues (in subcutaneous tissue in one case; in fetal lung in the other), but not in blood. No fetal anomalies were evident by ultrasound or at autopsy. These results along with other reported cases demonstrate the difficulty in counselling for mosaic trisomy 12.     

Five cases of prenatally diagnosed sex chromosome mosaicism

Prenatal detection of chromosome mosaicism is a relatively rare phenomenon and always constitutes a diagnostic problem. The difficulties are much more when the mosaics involve the sex chromosomes, because of the large phenotypic variability in individuals with these abnormalities. We studied 5 cases of true mosaics, 4 of these were prenatally detected, while 1 case was revealed only in the fetal lymphocytes after induced abortion. The limits of amniotic fluid culture with regard to the diagnosis of true mosaics and the difficulties arising in genetic counselling are discussed.     

Proposed guidelines for diagnosis of chromosome mosaicism in amniocytes based on data derived from chromosome mosaicism and pseudomosaicism studies

Currently, accepted protocol which has been developed at the Prenatal Diagnosis Laboratory of New York City (PDL) requires that when a chromosome abnormality is found in one or more cells in one flask, another 20–40 cells must be examined from one or two additional flasks. Chromosome mosaicism is diagnosed only when an identical abnormality is detected in cells from two or more flasks. In a recent PDL series of 12 000 cases studied according to this protocol, we diagnosed 801 cases (6.68 per cent) of single-cell pseudomosaicism (SCPM), 126 cases (1.05 per cent) of multiple-cell pseudomosaicism (MCPM), and 24 cases (0.2 per cent) of true mosaicism. Pseudomosaicism (PM) involving a structural abnormality was a frequent finding (2/3 of SCPM and 3/5 of MCPM), with an unbalanced structural abnormality in 55 per cent of SCPM and 24 per cent of MCPM. We also reviewed all true mosaic cases (a total of 50) diagnosed in the first 22000 PDL cases. Of these 50 cases, 23 were sex chromosome mosaics and 27 had autosomal mosaicism; 48 cases had numerical abnormalities and two had structural abnormalities. Twenty-five cases of mosaicism were diagnosed in the first 20 cells from two flasks, i.e., without additional work-up, whereas the other 25 cases required extensive work-up to establish a diagnosis (12 needed additional cell counts from the initial two culture flasks; 13 required harvesting a third flask for cell analysis). Our data plus review of other available data led us to conclude that rigorous efforts to diagnose true mosaicism have little impact in many instances, and therefore are not cost-effective. On the basis of all available data, a work-up for potential mosaicism involving a sex chromosome aneuploidy or structural abnormality should have less priority than a work-up for a common viable autosomal trisomy. We recommend revised guidelines for dealing with (1) a numerical versus a structural abnormality and (2) an autosomal versus a sex chromosome numerical aneuploidy. Emphasis should be placed on autosomes known to be associated with phenotypic abnormalities. These new guidelines, which cover both flask and in situ methods, should result in more effective prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis and reduced patient anxiety.     

Trisomy 20 mosaicism confirmed in a phenotypically normal liveborn

Prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 20 mosaicism in this case was based on cytogenetic analysis of cultured amniotic fluid cells (23/52 cells were trisomy 20 representing cells from each of four primary cultures). The pregnancy continued to term and the mosaicism was confirmed in the phenotypically normal male neonate by analysis of cultured foreskin fibroblasts (7/49 cells + 20) and placental cells 20/20 cells + 20) whereas the peripheral lymphocytes were cytogenetically normal (20/20 cells were 46,XY). This represents the first confirmation of trisomy 20 mosaicism in a phenotypically normal full-term neonate.     

Trisomy 12 mosaicism in amniocytes and dysmorphic child despite normal chromosomes in fetal blood sample

Trisomy 12 mosaicism (44 per cent) was detected prenatally in cultured amniocytes. A cordocentesis was performed to confirm the result. Only normal cells were found in the fetal blood sample. The fetus was estimated to be at a low risk of having a chromosomal abnormality and the pregnancy continued. Eight days after birth, a congenital heart defect was detected in the child. Several dysmorphic features were also evident. Further karyotyping of different tissues revealed normal blood and urinary cells but trisomic cells in the placenta (100 per cent) and in skin fibroblasts (25 per cent). The child died at 5 weeks of age. In this case, the fetal blood sample failed to reveal the real chromosome constitution of the fetus.     

Structural chromosomal mosaicism and prenatal diagnosis

True structural chromosomal mosaicism are rare events in prenatal cytogenetics practice and may lead to diagnostic and prognostic problems. Here is described the case of a fetus carrying an abnormal chromosome 15 made of a whole chromosome 2p translocated on its short arm in 10% of the cells, in association with a normal cell line. The fetal karyotype was 46,XX,add(15)(p10).ish t(2;15)(p10;q10)(WCP2+)[3]/46,XX[27]. Pregnancy was terminated and fetus examination revealed a growth retardation associated with a dysmorphism including dolichocephaly, hypertelorism, high forehead, low-set ears with prominent anthelix and a small nose, which were characteristic of partial trisomy 2p. Possible aetiologies for prenatal mosaicism involving a chromosomal structural abnormality are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Prenatal diagnosis of 45,X/46,XY mosaicism—A review and update

A total of 54 cases with prenatal diagnosis of 45,X/46,XY mosaicism was reviewed. Of 47 cases with information on phenotypic outcome, 42 cases (89·4 percent) were reported to be associated with a grossly normal male phenotype. Three cases (6·4 percent) were diagnosed as having mixed gonadal dysgenesis with internal asymmetrical gonads. Two other cases were questionably abnormal. In 40 cases with successful cytogenetic confirmatory studies, the overall rate of cytogenetic confirmation of 45,X/46,XY from tissues derived from fetus/liveborn/placenta was 70·O per cent. This review shows a major difference in the phenotypic outcome between postnatal diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis. Due to the ascertainment bias, almost all known patients with postnatal diagnosis of 45,X/46,XY mosaicism are phenotypically abnormal. Therefore, caution must be used in translating information derived from postnatal diagnosis to prenatal diagnosis. This review calls for collection of more data on 45,X/46,XY mosaicism diagnosed prenatally, more long-term follow-up of liveborn infants, and pathological studies of all abortuses. Emphasis is placed also on the importance of genetic counselling, ultrasound examination, and cytogenetic confirmation.     

Sex chromosome mosaicism not detected at amniocentesis

Amniocentesis was performed because of a fetal abdominal wall defect, and a 45,X karyotype was obtained. A near-normal male infant with no features of Turner syndrome was delivered. The karyotype of the infant was 45,X/46,X, dic(Y)(q11), with each of the cell lines present in approximately 50 per cent of the lymphocytes and fibroblasts examined.     

Pericentric inversion of chromosome 19: prenatal diagnosis and genetic counselling

During prenatal diagnosis for advanced maternal age, a pericentric inversion of a chromosome 19 was detected in a male fetus. The inversion was familial, transmitted to the fetus by the phenotypically normal mother. The pregnancy resulted in a term birth of a phenotypically normal male infant. Inversion 19 appears to be a rare abnormality with only seven families reported thus far including ours. Infants with duplication deficiencies for chromosome 19 have not been reported in these families. This may suggest an apparent suppression of crossing over and recombination within the inverted segment of chromosome 19 during meiosis.     

Ring 19 mosaicism detected during prenatal diagnosis

A ring chromosome 19 was found in 14 of 20 metaphases (67 per cent) derived from amniotic fluid cell cultures following amniocentesis because of increased maternal age. Elective termination of the pregnancy revealed a hypotrophic female fetus with mild dysmorphic signs, but no congenital malformations. The case is discussed in relation to three reports in the literature of ring chromosome 19 mosaicism in a phenotypically normal girl, a mentally retarded man, and a boy with normal psychomotor development and minor dysmorphic features.     

The impact of prenatal diagnosis on the occurrence of chromosome abnormalities

From the public health point of view, several formal attempts have been made to measure the impact of prenatal diagnosis (PND) on the incidence of Down's Syndrome (DS), but the results have varied widely. The impact of PND (reduction in the birth rate of chromosomally abnormal neonates) is related to utilization rates but quantitative estimates of this have not been established. In a three-year (1981–1983) total population study from Queensland, Australia, we present results to measure the impact of a voluntary PND programme on the birth incidence of DS, and also other chromosomally abnormal births. Utilization rates for the PND service were 15·5 per cent in that population of mothers 35 years and over. Numbers and rates of all cases of chromosomal abnormalities are presented, subclassified by type of diagnosis–-either by PND or by clinical diagnosis after birth. For the total population, 7·3 per cent of cases of DS were detected prenatally, and 15·4 per cent of all chromosome abnormalities. (A method for measuring the impact of PND is described.) Using this in conjunction with our demographic data, we estimate that with a 15 per cent utilization rate of PND by older mothers, 14 per cent of DS births can be prevented in this age group, or a 5 per cent overall reduction can be achieved if mothers of all ages are considered. One index–-the ratio of the percentage of DS births which are preventable compared with the population utilization rates of PND–-has potential for widespread use. Queensland data for this ratio is 0·34, a figure consistent with that from other studies. Thus a 3·5 per cent drop in the overall DS birth rate may be expected for each 10 per cent increase in the utilization rates of PND for mothers of 35 years and over. A diagram is presented which may serve as a model for improved data collection and better impact estimates in the future.     

Mitomycin C induced chromosome damage in fetal blood cultures and prenatal diagnosis of fanconi's anaemia

We report the use of fetal blood for the prenatal diagnosis of Fanconi anaemia (FA). The clastogenic action of Mitomycin C (MMC) is compared in blood cultures from different fetuses, normal controls and FA heterozygotes. The fetus at risk is shown to suffer from FA on the grounds of excessive chromosome breakage, both spontaneous and MMC induced.     

Chromosome mosaicism of the placenta—a cause of developmental failure of the fetus?

Fourteen (2.5 per cent) of 568 chromosome preparations after CVS showed discrepancies between the placental and fetal karyotype, mainly due to placental mosaicism. The presence of a second cell line within the placenta was confirmed in all but one case, in which cytogenetic reinvestigations were carried out. Our clinical data indicate that severe developmental retardation in the newborn is not to be expected if only the placenta carries the chromosomally abnormal cell line.