Replacement of Cytogenetics by aCGH in Prenatal Diagnosis

NCT03955588 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: UW 14-465
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 51
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

Conventional cytogenetics has been the gold standard for chromosomal analysis in prenatal diagnosis. It allows a microscopic examination for any structural abnormalities of chromosome with a turn-around time of 2 to 3 weeks and it is also labour intensive. Array comparative genome hybridisation (aCGH) provides a platform for a higher resolution analysis of chromosomal aberrations in a shorter period of time. The effectiveness of its application in prenatal diagnosis has been examined. The main clinical limitation lies on the difficult interpretation of certain copy number variants (CNV). Our previous study has demonstrated an increase diagnostic yield of 3.2% using aCGH over conventional cytogenetics in the first-tier test study and by 6% as a further test in a cohort of fetuses with ultrasound abnormality and normal karyotype findings. This finding were consistent with the overall reported of 5.2% to 10% increased detection rate by other studies. Various authorities have also approved the use of aCGH as an adjunct diagnostic tool in prenatal cases with fetal ultrasound abnormalities. The presence study aims to demonstrate the clinical acceptability on the use of aCGH to replace cytogenetics in prenatal diagnosis. For patients requiring invasive prenatal diagnosis by chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis, they will be offered the options of having either conventional cytogenetics or aCGH. A standard unbiased counselling procedure will be performed by well trained midwives. For patients opting for conventional cytogenetics, the current procedure of karyotyping will be performed. For those opting for aCGH, a quantitative fluorescent Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) will be performed first to exclude common aneuploidies and triploidies. aCGH will be arranged for those with normal PCR results and conventional cytogenetics will be reserved for visualization of clinically significant CNVs. All patients will be asked to complete the same questionnaire that has been adopted for the study on "Questionnaire survey on Knowledge and Acceptance on Application of whole genome array Comparative Genomic Hybridisation (aCGH) in Prenatal Diagnosis".

Conditions

Prenatal Diagnosis

Keywords

Cytogenetics; aCGH; Prenatal Diagnosis

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• The preference of aCGH to conventional cytogenetics

  Proportion of subjects choosing aCGH

  At the time of recruitment

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Cost-effectiveness analysis of chromosomal microarray as primary test for prenatal diagnosis in Hong Kong

  After completion of the aCGH for the last recruited subject in 2016

Study Arms (1)

Women undergoing invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures

For women requiring invasive prenatal diagnosis by chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis, they will be offered the options of having either conventional cytogenetics or aCGH.

Diagnostic Test: aCGH

Interventions

aCGH DIAGNOSTIC_TEST

Also known as: conventional cytogenetics

Women undergoing invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: female
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

All women who require invasive prenatal diagnosis will be recruited.

You may qualify if:

• All pregnant women requiring chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis at Tsan Yuk Hospital

You may not qualify if:

• Patients who cannot read or understand Chinese or English

Sponsors & Collaborators

• The University of Hong Kong: lead

Related Publications (7)

• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics. Committee Opinion No. 581: the use of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Dec;122(6):1374-7. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000438962.16108.d1.

  PMID: 24264715 BACKGROUND

• Callaway JL, Shaffer LG, Chitty LS, Rosenfeld JA, Crolla JA. The clinical utility of microarray technologies applied to prenatal cytogenetics in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype: a review of the literature. Prenat Diagn. 2013 Dec;33(12):1119-23. doi: 10.1002/pd.4209. Epub 2013 Sep 8.

  PMID: 23983223 BACKGROUND

• de Wit MC, Srebniak MI, Govaerts LC, Van Opstal D, Galjaard RJ, Go AT. Additional value of prenatal genomic array testing in fetuses with isolated structural ultrasound abnormalities and a normal karyotype: a systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Feb;43(2):139-46. doi: 10.1002/uog.12575.

  PMID: 23897843 BACKGROUND

• Hillman SC, McMullan DJ, Hall G, Togneri FS, James N, Maher EJ, Meller CH, Williams D, Wapner RJ, Maher ER, Kilby MD. Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jun;41(6):610-20. doi: 10.1002/uog.12464. Epub 2013 May 7.

  PMID: 23512800 BACKGROUND

• Hillman SC, Pretlove S, Coomarasamy A, McMullan DJ, Davison EV, Maher ER, Kilby MD. Additional information from array comparative genomic hybridization technology over conventional karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jan;37(1):6-14. doi: 10.1002/uog.7754.

  PMID: 20658510 BACKGROUND

• Kan AS, Lau ET, Tang WF, Chan SS, Ding SC, Chan KY, Lee CP, Hui PW, Chung BH, Leung KY, Ma T, Leung WC, Tang MH. Whole-genome array CGH evaluation for replacing prenatal karyotyping in Hong Kong. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 5;9(2):e87988. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087988. eCollection 2014.

  PMID: 24505343 BACKGROUND

• Novelli A, Grati FR, Ballarati L, Bernardini L, Bizzoco D, Camurri L, Casalone R, Cardarelli L, Cavalli P, Ciccone R, Clementi M, Dalpra L, Gentile M, Gelli G, Grammatico P, Malacarne M, Nardone AM, Pecile V, Simoni G, Zuffardi O, Giardino D. Microarray application in prenatal diagnosis: a position statement from the cytogenetics working group of the Italian Society of Human Genetics (SIGU), November 2011. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Apr;39(4):384-8. doi: 10.1002/uog.11092.

  PMID: 22262341 BACKGROUND

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Prinicipal Investigator

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: May 7, 2019
• First Posted: May 20, 2019
• Study Start: November 21, 2014
• Primary Completion: February 28, 2016
• Study Completion: February 28, 2016
• Last Updated: May 20, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-05