Trisomy 15 CPM: Probable origins, pregnancy outcome and risk of fetal UPD

Citation
C. Delozier-blanchet et al., Trisomy 15 CPM: Probable origins, pregnancy outcome and risk of fetal UPD, PRENAT DIAG, 19(1), 1999, pp. 29-35
Citations number
30
Categorie Soggetti
Reproductive Medicine","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS
ISSN journal
01973851 → ACNP
Volume
19
Issue
1
Year of publication
1999
Pages
29 - 35
Database
ISI
SICI code
0197-3851(199901)19:1<29:T1CPOP>2.0.ZU;2-D
Abstract
Different origins for trisomy 15 mosaicism confined to the placenta have be en suggested. We have analysed the data on trisomy 15 mosaicism in EUCROMIC . Trisomy 15 mosaicism or non-mosaic fete-placental discrepancy on CVS was registered in 0.027 per cent of samples karyotyped (34/126 465): 28/34 had confined placental mosaicism (CPM)I 1/34 was probably true fetal mosaicism and 5/34 could not be classified. In 17 of the 28 pregnancies with CPM, cyt ogenetic information existed on both cytotrophoblast lineage (direct CVS pr eparation or short-term incubation) and extra-embryonic mesoderm, EEM (vill us culture). CPM was of type I (restricted to the cytotrophoblast) in 5/17 (29 per cent); type II (restricted to the EEM) in 4/17 (24 per cent) and ty pe III (both cytotrophoblast and EEM) in 8/17 (47 per cent). Testing for un iparental disomy (UPD) for chromosome IS in the fetus or child was done in nine cases, showing upd(15)mat in 1/9, and biparental inheritance in 8/9. U pd(15)mat, clinically diagnosed due to Prader Willi syndrome, but without D NA analysis, was registered in one additional liveborn child. Analysis of t hese 17 cases, in conjunction with 10 similar reports in the literature als o having cytogenetic data from both cell lineages, indicates two categories of trisomy 15 CPM. One has a high proportion of trisomic cells: often with a type III distribution, and an observed high risk of UPD and adverse preg nancy outcome. The second has lower proportions of trisomic cells, primaril y of type I or II distribution, and a lower empirical risk of UPD or pregna ncy loss. Based on this cytogenetic analysis, supported by the available DN A data, we suggest that, in contrast to trisomy 16 CPM, the trisomic cell l ine originates from a meiotic error in only about 50 per cent of cases of t risomy 15 CPM, the rest being the result of post-zygotic, mitotic non-disju nction. Despite this, we recommend amniocentesis following the finding of a mosaic or non-mosaic trisomy 15 by CVS, in order to exclude both UPD and p otential true fetal mosaicism. Copyright (C) 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.