Application of next-generation sequencing technique in genetic analysis of spontaneous abortion
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2018.12.004
- VernacularTitle:高通量测序技术用于流产物遗传学分析的价值
- Author:
Yilin GUO
1
;
Maosheng GU
;
Li WANG
;
Suzhen QU
;
Shuwen XUE
;
Haijian WANG
;
Zhaoling XUAN
;
Xiangdong KONG
Author Information
1. 450052,郑州大学第一附属医院遗传与产前诊断中心
- Keywords:
Abortion,spontaneous;
High-throughput nucleotide sequencing;
Chromosome aberrations;
Polymorphism,single nucleotide
- From:
Chinese Journal of Perinatal Medicine
2018;21(12):808-816
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the value of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technique for genetic analysis of spontaneous abortion. Methods From January to June 2017, 154 patients who visited the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University for spontaneous abortion were enrolled. All abortion tissue samples were analyzed by both NGS combined with short tandem repeat (STR) and single nucleotide polymorphism array (SNP-array). Results of the two methods were compared by Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Results (1) Chromosomal abnormalities were detected in 109 of the 154 cases (70.7%), including 52 (47.7%) of numerical chromosomal abnormalities, 49 (45.0%) of structural chromosomal abnormalities, six (5.5%) of mosaicism, and two (1.8%) of uniparental disomy (UPD). In those 52 cases of numerical chromosome abnormalities, there were 45 of chromosome aneuploidy and seven of polyploidy. The top three numerical chromosomal abnormalities were 45,X (27.0%, 14/52), trisomy 22 (9.6%, 5/52) and trisomy 16 (7.7%, 4/52). Forty-nine structural abnormality cases carried 67 copy number variations (CNV), including 13 pathogenic CNV (pCNV, 19.4%), 24 variants of unknown clinical significance (35.8%) and 30 benign CNV (44.8%). In those 13 pCNVs, two were responsible for microdeletion and microduplication syndromes. (2) SNP-array was successful in 152 cases, but failed in two (1.3%) due to genomic DNA <200 ng. However, NGS technology was successful in all 154 cases and identified chromosomal abnormalities in the two cases that SNP-array had failed. No statistically significant difference was shown in the detection rate of chromosomal abnormalities between SNP-array and NGS technology [70.4% (107/152) vs 67.5% (104/154), χ2=0.293, P=0.588]. (3) No significant difference in the detection of chromosome aneuploidy (six cases in each group, 3.9% vs 3.9%) and mosaicism (45 cases in each group, 29.2% vs 29.6%) was found between NGS technology and SNP-array. Three cases of polyploidy (69, XXX) and two of UPD were identified by SNP-array, but not by NGS. When combined with STR, NGS was able to detect all three cases of polyploidy (69, XXX). (4) Forty-seven structural abnormality cases detected by SNP-array carried 53 CNVs, and 49 detected by NGS carried 67 CNVs. (5) NGS detected ten, three and one more CNVs than SNP-array did when the genome lengths were 100-<500, 500-<1 000 and ≥1 000 kb, respectively. Conclusions NGS can be used to detect chromosomal aneuploidy and mosaicism that can be identified by SNP-array with fewer limitations on total amount of genome. Moreover, CNVs that fail to be identified by SNP-array can also be detected by NGS. When combined with STR, NGS can effectively detect chromosomal polyploidy. Therefore, NGS could be a potential genetic analysis method for spontaneous abortion and of importance for genetic counseling.
