Noninvasive screening by cell-free DNA for 22q11.2 deletion: Benefits,limitations, and challenges

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing for fetal aneuploidy is one of the most important technical advances in prenatal care. Additional chromosome targets beyond common aneuploidies, including the 22q11.2 microdeletion, are now available because of this clinical testing technology. While there are numerous potential benefits, 22q11.2 microdeletion screening using cfDNA testing also presents significant limitations and pitfalls. Practitioners who are offering this test should provide comprehensive pretest and posttest prenatal counselling. The discussion should include the possibility of an absence of a result, as well as the risk of possible discordance between cfDNA screening results and the actual fetal genetic chromosomal constitution. The goal of this review is to provide an overview of the cfDNA testing technologies for 22q11.2 microdeletions screening, describe the current state of test validation and clinical experience, review “no results” and discordant findings based on differing technologies, and discuss management options.     

Screen-positive rate in cell-free DNA screening for microdeletion 22q11.2

Objective

To examine the impact of the fetal fraction (FF) on the screen-positive rate in screening for microdeletion 22q11.2.

Methods

This study is based on samples that were analyzed using the Harmony® Prenatal Test (Roche Inc). The study cohort comprised samples from women with singleton pregnancies who were at least 16 years old and at least at 11 weeks' gestation. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine significant covariates that carry an impact on the screen-positive rate.

Results

The study population consisted of 52,019 pregnancies, including 309 pregnancies with a high-risk result for microdeletion 22q11.2. Thus, the overall screen-positive rate was 0.59%. In the low-risk group, the FF was 10.1%, and in the high-risk group, it was 7.3%. Regression analysis indicated a strong correlation between the FF and the screen-positive rate. In the cases with an FF of <11.0%, the screen-positive rate was 0.92%, while it was 0.13% in the group with a higher FF.

Conclusion

The screen-positive rate depends on the FF. In order to keep the rate low, we recommend restricting the analysis to samples with a FF of 11% and more.     

Neuropsychiatric aspects of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: considerations in the prenatal setting

Most major neuropsychiatric outcomes of concern to families are not detectable by prenatal ultrasound. The introduction of genome-wide chromosomal microarray analysis to prenatal clinical diagnostic testing has increased the detection of pathogenic 22q11.2 deletions, which cause the most common genomic disorder. The recent addition of this and other microdeletions to non-invasive prenatal screening methods using cell-free fetal DNA has further propelled interest in outcomes. Conditions associated with 22q11.2 deletions include intellect ranging from intellectual disability to average, schizophrenia and other treatable psychiatric conditions, epilepsy, and early-onset Parkinson's disease. However, there is currently no way to predict how severe the lifetime expression will be. Available evidence suggests no major role in these neuropsychiatric outcomes for the congenital cardiac or most other structural anomalies that may be detectable on ultrasound. This article provides an outline of the lifetime neuropsychiatric phenotype of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome that will be useful to clinicians involved in prenatal diagnosis and related genetic counselling. The focus is on information that will be most relevant to two common situations: detection of a 22q11.2 deletion in a fetus or newborn, and new diagnosis of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome in a parent without a previous molecular diagnosis. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Confined placental mosaicism for 22q11.2 deletion as the etiology for discordant positive NIPT results

22q11.2 deletion, the most common microdeletion syndrome within the general population, is estimated to have a prevalence of 1 in 3000 to 6000. Non-invasive prenatal testing has recently expanded to include screening for several microdeletions including 22q11.2. Given the expansion of prenatal screening options to include microdeletions, it is important to understand the limits of this technology and the variety of reasons that a discordant positive result can occur. Here, we describe a case of a pregnant woman who received a positive non-invasive prenatal maternal plasma screen for 22q11.2 deletion. Maternal and postnatal neonatal peripheral blood cytogenetic, PCR, and fluorescence in situ hybridization studies were normal, but the placenta was mosaic for 22q11.2 deletion in two of three biopsy sites. This case illustrates both the complexities of pre- and post-test counseling for microdeletion screening and the potential for a discordant positive microdeletion result because of confined placental mosaicism. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Challenges in non-invasive prenatal screening for sub-chromosomal copy number variations using cell-free DNA

Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) has revolutionized the approach to prenatal fetal aneuploidy screening. Many commercial providers now offer analyses for sub-chromosomal copy number variations (CNVs). Here, we review the use of NIPS in the context of screening for microdeletions and microduplications, issues surrounding the choice of disorders tested for, and the advantages and disadvantages associated with the inclusion of microdeletions to current NIPS. Several studies have claimed benefits; however, we suggest that microdeletions have not demonstrated a low enough false positive rate to be deemed practical or ethically acceptable, especially considering their low positive predictive values. Because a positive NIPS result should be confirmed using diagnostic techniques, and false positive rates are as high as 90% for some microdeletions, diagnostic testing seems preferable when the goal is to maximize the detection of microdeletion or microduplication syndromes.