Redefining the risks of prenatally ascertained supernumerary marker chromosomes: a collaborative study

Background: A marker chromosome is defined as a structurally abnormal chromosome that cannot be identified by routine cytogenetics. The risk for phenotypic abnormalities associated with a marker chromosome depends on several factors, including inheritance, mode of ascertainment, chromosomal origin, and the morphology, content, and structure of the marker. Methods: to understand the karyotype-phenotype relationship of prenatally ascertained supernumerary de novo marker chromosomes, we combined data from prenatal cases obtained from 12 laboratories with those from studies in the literature. We were able to obtain cytogenetic and phenotypic data from 108 prenatally ascertained supernumerary de novo marker chromosomes to refine the phenotypic risk associated with these markers. Because of the growing number of cases and because more techniques are available to delineate marker morphology, we have been able to group risk estimates into subcategories, such as by marker type and whether there are ultrasound abnormalities. Results: If a de novo supernumerary marker chromosome is found prenatally, our data suggest there is a 26% risk for phenotypic abnormality when there is no other information defining the marker (such as chromosomal origin or information about the existing phenotype). However, if high resolution ultrasound studies are normal, this risk reduces to 18%. Conclusions: Our findings strongly support the value of additional genetic studies for more precisely defining the risk in individual cases involving marker chromosomes.

[1]  M. Djalali,et al.  The genetic significance of accessory bisatellited marker chromosomes , 2004, Human Genetics.

[2]  G. Senger,et al.  Two new cases of analphoid marker chromosomes , 2003, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[3]  A. Schinzel,et al.  Maternal uniparental isodisomy 10 and mosaicism for an additional marker chromosome derived from the paternal chromosome 10 in a fetus , 2002, Prenatal diagnosis.

[4]  A. George,et al.  Prenatal diagnosis of partial tetrasomy 14: a case study , 2002, Prenatal diagnosis.

[5]  S. Schwartz,et al.  Molecular approaches for delineating marker chromosomes. , 2002, Methods in molecular biology.

[6]  E. Sala,et al.  Identification of a small supernumerary marker chromosome, r(2)(p10q11.2), and the problem of determining prognosis , 2001, Prenatal diagnosis.

[7]  D. Bettelheim,et al.  Prenatal diagnosis of a de novo supernumerary marker derived from chromosome 16 , 2001, Prenatal diagnosis.

[8]  G. Mortier,et al.  Detailed characterization of 12 supernumerary ring chromosomes using micro-FISH and search for uniparental disomy. , 2001, American journal of medical genetics.

[9]  K. Hirschhorn,et al.  Prenatal molecular cytogenetic diagnosis of partial tetrasomy 10p due to neocentromere formation in an inversion duplication analphoid marker chromosome , 2001, Cytogenetic and Genome Research.

[10]  J. Crolla,et al.  An analphoid supernumerary marker chromosome derived from chromosome 3 ascertained in a fetus with multiple malformations , 2000, Journal of medical genetics.

[11]  T. Liehr,et al.  Molecular cytogenetic characterization of a prenatally detected supernumerary minute marker chromosome 8 , 1999, Prenatal diagnosis.

[12]  E. Schröck,et al.  Prenatal diagnosis of a mosaic extra structurally‐abnormal chromosome by spectral karyotyping , 1999, Prenatal diagnosis.

[13]  J. Crolla.  FISH and molecular studies of autosomal supernumerary marker chromosomes excluding those derived from chromosome 15: II. Review of the literature. , 1998, American journal of medical genetics.

[14]  K. Brøndum‐Nielsen,et al.  A 10‐year survey, 1980–1990, of prenatally diagnosed small supernumerary marker chromosomes, identified by fish analysis. Outcome and follow‐up of 14 cases diagnosed in a series of 12 699 prenatal samples , 1995, Prenatal diagnosis.

[15]  E. Blennow,et al.  Swedish survey on extra structurally abnormal chromosomes in 39 105 consecutive prenatal diagnoses: Prevalence and characterization by fluorescence in situ hybridization , 1994, Prenatal diagnosis.

[16]  D. Warburton,et al.  De novo balanced chromosome rearrangements and extra marker chromosomes identified at prenatal diagnosis: clinical significance and distribution of breakpoints. , 1991, American journal of human genetics.

[17]  J. L. C. Juan,et al.  Small marker chromosomes in a series of 1,000 prenatal diagnoses by amniocentesis. , 1990 .

[18]  J. M. Troyano Luque,et al.  Small marker chromosomes in a series of 1,000 prenatal diagnoses by amniocentesis. , 1990, Annales de Genetique.

[19]  J. D. den Hollander,et al.  Marker chromosomes in A series of 10000 prenatal diagnoses. Cytogenetic and follow‐up studies , 1987, Prenatal diagnosis.