Practice guideline: joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this guideline is to provide updated recommendations for Canadian genetic counsellors, medical geneticists, maternal fetal medicine specialists, clinical laboratory geneticists and other practitioners regarding the use of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis. This guideline replaces the 2011 Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC)-Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) Joint Technical Update. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group consisting of medical geneticists, genetic counsellors, maternal fetal medicine specialists and clinical laboratory geneticists was assembled to review existing literature and guidelines for use of CMA in prenatal care and to make recommendations relevant to the Canadian context. The statement was circulated for comment to the CCMG membership-at-large for feedback and, following incorporation of feedback, was approved by the CCMG Board of Directors on 5 June 2017 and the SOGC Board of Directors on 19 June 2017. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations include but are not limited to: (1) CMA should be offered following a normal rapid aneuploidy screen when multiple fetal malformations are detected (II-1A) or for nuchal translucency (NT) ≥3.5 mm (II-2B) (recommendation 1); (2) a professional with expertise in prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis should provide genetic counselling to obtain informed consent, discuss the limitations of the methodology, obtain the parental decisions for return of incidental findings (II-2A) (recommendation 4) and provide post-test counselling for reporting of test results (III-A) (recommendation 9); (3) the resolution of chromosomal microarray analysis should be similar to postnatal microarray platforms to ensure small pathogenic variants are detected. To minimise the reporting of uncertain findings, it is recommended that variants of unknown significance (VOUS) smaller than 500 Kb deletion or 1 Mb duplication not be routinely reported in the prenatal context. Additionally, VOUS above these cut-offs should only be reported if there is significant supporting evidence that deletion or duplication of the region may be pathogenic (III-B) (recommendation 5); (4) secondary findings associated with a medically actionable disorder with childhood onset should be reported, whereas variants associated with adult-onset conditions should not be reported unless requested by the parents or disclosure can prevent serious harm to family members (III-A) (recommendation 8).The working group recognises that there is variability across Canada in delivery of prenatal testing, and these recommendations were developed to promote consistency and provide a minimum standard for all provinces and territories across the country (recommendation 9).

Second and first trimester estimation of risk for Down syndrome: implementation and performance in the SAFER study.

OBJECTIVES: Document patient choices and screening performance (false positive and detection rates) when three improved Down syndrome screening protocols were introduced coincidentally. METHOD: Second-trimester 'triple marker' screening was expanded by adding second-trimester dimeric inhibin-A (four-marker), with or without first-trimester pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (five-marker). Nuchal translucency (NT) measurements were included when available from accredited sonographers (six-marker). For assigning risk, two sets of marker distribution parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: Over 3.5 years, 8571 women enrolled (median age 30.6 years). Uptake of the four-, five- and six-marker protocols was 18%, 46% and 36%, respectively. Of those selecting an integrated test (five or six markers), 9.7% did not provide the second trimester serum sample. False positive rates decreased with added markers (5.2%, 5.1% and 2.5%, respectively) and varied between the two parameter sets, while detection remained high. Overall, 21 of 23 cases were detected (91%, 95% CI 73-98%) at a 4.2% false positive rate (95% CI 3.3-5.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Integrated screening protocols were chosen 4.6 times more often than four-marker screening (82% vs. 18% uptake). Overall detection was higher and false positives lower, consistent with recent guidelines. Important performance factors include gestational dating method, risk cut-off, and the parameter set used to assign risk.

Clinical genetics and the Hutterite population: a review of Mendelian disorders.

The Hutterian Bretheren is an isolated population living on the North American prairies, the current community exceeding 40,000 in number. Their unique genetic history has contributed to a founder effect, which is reflected in the Mendelian disorders present in this population today. Genetic studies in the Hutterite population have led to the identification of a number of genes over the last several years and highlights the power of this population for gene identification. However, for the more than 30 autosomal recessive conditions currently recognized in this population, the gene or Hutterite specific mutation remains to be identified for over half and novel autosomal recessive syndromes continue to be recognized. This review summarizes what is currently understood about the molecular etiology of the Mendelian disorders and highlights the cardinal features of those disorders that are unique to or over-represented in this population.