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
. 2022 Oct;59(10):931-937.
doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2021-107897. Epub 2021 Sep 20.

Clinical application of fetal genome-wide sequencing during pregnancy: position statement of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists

Affiliations

Clinical application of fetal genome-wide sequencing during pregnancy: position statement of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists

Joanna Lazier et al. J Med Genet. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose and scope: The aim of this position statement is to provide recommendations for Canadian healthcare professionals regarding the use of genome-wide sequencing (GWS) in the context of diagnostic testing of the fetus during pregnancy. This statement was developed to facilitate clinical translation of GWS as a prenatal diagnostic test and the development of best practices in Canada, but the applicability of this document is broader and aims to help professionals in other healthcare systems.

Methods of statement development: A multidisciplinary group was assembled to review existing literature on fetal GWS for genetic diagnosis in the context of suspected monogenic diseases and to make recommendations relevant to the Canadian context. The statement was circulated for comments to the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) membership-at-large and, following incorporation of feedback, approved by the CCMG Board of Directors on 19 February 2021.

Results and conclusions: The use of prenatal GWS is indicated for the investigation of multiple fetal anomalies. Its use in the context of isolated fetal anomaly should be guided by available resources and current evidence, which is continually changing. During pregnancy, GWS should be ordered by, or in collaboration with, a medical geneticist. It should be used following detailed phenotyping to interrogate known disease genes, preferably using a trio approach, following detailed fetal phenotyping. Testing should be done with an overall aim to help in the management of the pregnancy, delivery and postnatal care. It should be guided by personal utility of the test for the pregnant person and clinical utility for pregnancy and birth management, as outlined herein. Genetic counselling is crucial in making the parental decision an informed decision. Chromosomal microarray analysis should be completed in parallel or prior to GWS and should be preceded by Quantitative Fluorescent PCR (QF-PCR) for detection of common aneuploidies. In normal circumstances, only pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants with a high likelihood of being associated with the identified fetal anomalies should be reported. Reporting of secondary findings, defined as purposeful analysis of variants in a set of medically actionable genes, should not, by default, be performed in the prenatal context. Laboratories should only report incidental findings that reveal risk of a significant Mendelian condition during infancy and childhood. Should a laboratory have a policy for reporting incidental findings in medically actionable adult-onset conditions, they should only be reported with explicit opt-in consent signed by the tested individuals. Genetic counselling is crucial in disclosing the test results and the implications the results may have for the fetus. It should be emphasised that negative results do not rule out a genetic diagnosis nor guarantee a good prognosis. Postnatal phenotyping and reanalysis of existing data should be considered. Families should be given the opportunity to participate in research studies as appropriate. These recommendations will be routinely re-evaluated as knowledge of the diagnostic and clinical utility of fetal GWS during pregnancy improves.

Keywords: and neonatal diseases and abnormalities; congenital; genetic counselling; hereditary; infectious; pregnancy complications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: TN: spouse employed by Illumina.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Decision aid to determine the speed and timing of GWS to be ordered in the diagnostic assessment of an affected pregnancy. Other relevant tests (eg, rapid aneuploidy detection and microarray) should be integrated as appropriate. This suggested framework is based on our current understanding and will be re-evaluated over time as new data become available. CCMG, Canadian College of Medical Geneticists; GWS, genome-wide sequencing; TAT, turnaround time. *See indications section of recommendations; #See CCMG exome guidelines.

References

    1. Persson M, Cnattingius S, Villamor E, Söderling J, Pasternak B, Stephansson O, Neovius M. Risk of major congenital malformations in relation to maternal overweight and obesity severity: cohort study of 1.2 million singletons. BMJ 2017;357:j2563. 10.1136/bmj.j2563 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cargill Y, Morin L. No. 223-Content of a complete routine second trimester obstetrical ultrasound examination and report. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2017;39:e144–9. 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.04.022 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Armour CM, Dougan SD, Brock J-A, Chari R, Chodirker BN, DeBie I, Evans JA, Gibson WT, Kolomietz E, Nelson TN, Tihy F, Thomas MA, Stavropoulos DJ, On-Behalf-Of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists . Practice guideline: joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada. J Med Genet 2018;55:215–21. 10.1136/jmedgenet-2017-105013 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, Savage M, Platt LD, Saltzman D, Grobman WA, Klugman S, Scholl T, Simpson JL, McCall K, Aggarwal VS, Bunke B, Nahum O, Patel A, Lamb AN, Thom EA, Beaudet AL, Ledbetter DH, Shaffer LG, Jackson L. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:2175–84. 10.1056/NEJMoa1203382 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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;37:6–14. 10.1002/uog.7754 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types