Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Jan;38(1):10-19.
doi: 10.1002/pd.5102. Epub 2017 Jul 25.

Promises, pitfalls and practicalities of prenatal whole exome sequencing

Affiliations
Review

Promises, pitfalls and practicalities of prenatal whole exome sequencing

Sunayna Best et al. Prenat Diagn. 2018 Jan.

Abstract

Prenatal genetic diagnosis provides information for pregnancy and perinatal decision-making and management. In several small series, prenatal whole exome sequencing (WES) approaches have identified genetic diagnoses when conventional tests (karyotype and microarray) were not diagnostic. Here, we review published prenatal WES studies and recent conference abstracts. Thirty-one studies were identified, with diagnostic rates in series of five or more fetuses varying between 6.2% and 80%. Differences in inclusion criteria and trio versus singleton approaches to sequencing largely account for the wide range of diagnostic rates. The data suggest that diagnostic yields will be greater in fetuses with multiple anomalies or in cases preselected following genetic review. Beyond its ability to improve diagnostic rates, we explore the potential of WES to improve understanding of prenatal presentations of genetic disorders and lethal fetal syndromes. We discuss prenatal phenotyping limitations, counselling challenges regarding variants of uncertain significance, incidental and secondary findings, and technical problems in WES. We review the practical, ethical, social and economic issues that must be considered before prenatal WES could become part of routine testing. Finally, we reflect upon the potential future of prenatal genetic diagnosis, including a move towards whole genome sequencing and non-invasive whole exome and whole genome testing. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: None declared

References

    1. Update on overall prevalence of major birth defects – Atlanta, Georgia 1978–2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008;57:1–5. - PubMed
    1. Mathews TJ MM, MacDorman F, Thoma ME. Infant mortality statistics from the 2013 period linked birth/infant death data set. National Vital Statistics Reports [Internet] 2015;64(9):1–30. 08/03/2017. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/data.html. - PubMed
    1. Boyd PA, Tonks AM, Rankin J, et al. Monitoring the prenatal detection of structural fetal congenital anomalies in England and Wales: register-based study. J Med Screen. 2011;18:2–7. - PubMed
    1. Calzolari E, Barisic I, Loane M, et al. Epidemiology of multiple congenital anomalies in Europe: a EUROCAT population-based registry study. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2014;100:270–6. - PubMed
    1. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2175–84. - PMC - PubMed