Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Pediatrics 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Study protocol

Study protocol: childhood outcomes of fetal genomic variants: the PrenatAL Microarray (PALM) cohort study

Authors: Lisa Hui, Cecilia Pynaker, Joanne Kennedy, Sharon Lewis, David J. Amor, Susan P. Walker, Jane Halliday, On behalf of the PALM cohort study group

Published in: BMC Pediatrics | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The implementation of genomic testing in pregnancy means that couples have access to more information about their child’s genetic make-up before birth than ever before. One of the resulting challenges is the management of genetic variations with unclear clinical significance. This population-based study will help to close this critical knowledge gap through a multidisciplinary cohort study of children with and without genomic copy number variants (CNVs) diagnosed before birth. By comparing children with prenatally-ascertained CNVs to children without a CNV, we aim to (1) examine their developmental, social-emotional and health status; (2) measure the impact of prenatal diagnosis of a CNV on maternal perceptions of child health, behavior and development; and (3) determine the proportion of prenatally-ascertained CNVs of unknown or uncertain significance that are reclassified as benign or pathogenic after 2 or more years.

Methods

This study will establish and follow up a cohort of mother-child pairs who have had a prenatal diagnosis with a chromosomal microarray from 2013-2019 in the Australian state of Victoria. Children aged 12 months to 7 years will be assessed using validated, age-appropriate measures. The primary outcome measures will be the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence IV (WPSSI-IV) IQ score (2.5 to 7 year old’s), the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (12-30 months old), and the Brief Infant- Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) score. Clinical assessment by a pediatrician will also be performed. Secondary outcomes will be scores obtained from the: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale, Maternal Postnatal Attachment Questionnaire, the Vulnerable Child Scale, Profile of Mood States, Parent Sense of Competence Scale. A descriptive analysis of the reclassification rates of CNVs after ≥2 years will be performed.

Discussion

This study protocol describes the first Australian cohort study following children after prenatal diagnostic testing with chromosomal microarray. It will provide long-term outcomes of fetal genomic variants to guide evidence-based pre-and postnatal care. This, in turn, will inform future efforts to mitigate the negative consequences of conveying genomic uncertainty during pregnancy.

Trial registration

ACTRN12620000446​965p; Registered on April 6, 2020.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia's mothers and babies 2015—in brief. Perinatal statistics series no 33, cat No PER 91. 2017. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia's mothers and babies 2015—in brief. Perinatal statistics series no 33, cat No PER 91. 2017.
5.
go back to reference Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S, Biesecker LG, Brothman AR, Carter NP, et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86(5):749–64.CrossRefPubMedCentral Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S, Biesecker LG, Brothman AR, Carter NP, et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86(5):749–64.CrossRefPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, et al. Chromosomal Microarray versus Karyotyping for Prenatal Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(23):2175–84.CrossRefPubMedCentral Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, et al. Chromosomal Microarray versus Karyotyping for Prenatal Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(23):2175–84.CrossRefPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Committee Opinion No.682. Microarrays and Next-Generation Sequencing Technology: The Use of Advanced Genetic Diagnostic Tools in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(6):e262–e8.CrossRef Committee Opinion No.682. Microarrays and Next-Generation Sequencing Technology: The Use of Advanced Genetic Diagnostic Tools in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(6):e262–e8.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Vetro A, Bouman K, Hastings R, McMullan DJ, Vermeesch JR, Miller K, et al. The introduction of arrays in prenatal diagnosis: a special challenge. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(6):923–9.CrossRefPubMedCentral Vetro A, Bouman K, Hastings R, McMullan DJ, Vermeesch JR, Miller K, et al. The introduction of arrays in prenatal diagnosis: a special challenge. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(6):923–9.CrossRefPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Hui L, Hutchinson B, Poulton A, Halliday J. Population-based impact of noninvasive prenatal screening on screening and diagnostic testing for fetal aneuploidy. Genet Med. 2017;19(12):1338–45.CrossRefPubMedCentral Hui L, Hutchinson B, Poulton A, Halliday J. Population-based impact of noninvasive prenatal screening on screening and diagnostic testing for fetal aneuploidy. Genet Med. 2017;19(12):1338–45.CrossRefPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Brabbing-Goldstein D, Reches A, Svirsky R, Bar-Shira A, Yaron Y. Dilemmas in genetic counseling for low-penetrance neuro-susceptibility loci detected on prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(2):247 e1-.e12.CrossRefPubMedCentral Brabbing-Goldstein D, Reches A, Svirsky R, Bar-Shira A, Yaron Y. Dilemmas in genetic counseling for low-penetrance neuro-susceptibility loci detected on prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(2):247 e1-.e12.CrossRefPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Muys J, Jacquemyn Y, Blaumeiser B, Bourlard L, Brison N, Bulk S, et al. Prenatally detected copy number variants in a nationalcohort: A postnatal follow-up study. Prenat Diagn. 2020;40(10):1272-83. Muys J, Jacquemyn Y, Blaumeiser B, Bourlard L, Brison N, Bulk S, et al. Prenatally detected copy number variants in a nationalcohort: A postnatal follow-up study. Prenat Diagn. 2020;40(10):1272-83.
14.
go back to reference Lindquist A, Hui L, Poulton A, Kluckow E, Hutchinson B, Pertile MD, et al. State-wide utilization and performance of traditional and cell-free DNA-based prenatal testing pathways: the Victorian Perinatal Record Linkage (PeRL) study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;56(2):215–24.CrossRefPubMedCentral Lindquist A, Hui L, Poulton A, Kluckow E, Hutchinson B, Pertile MD, et al. State-wide utilization and performance of traditional and cell-free DNA-based prenatal testing pathways: the Victorian Perinatal Record Linkage (PeRL) study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;56(2):215–24.CrossRefPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Hui L, Muggli EE, Halliday JL. Population-based trends in prenatal screening and diagnosis for aneuploidy: A retrospective analysis of 38 years of state-wide data. BJOG. 2016;123(1):90–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral Hui L, Muggli EE, Halliday JL. Population-based trends in prenatal screening and diagnosis for aneuploidy: A retrospective analysis of 38 years of state-wide data. BJOG. 2016;123(1):90–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Desai P, Haber H, Bulafka J, Russell A, Clifton R, Zachary J, et al. Impacts of variants of uncertain significance on parental perceptions of children after prenatal chromosome microarray testing. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(10):740–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral Desai P, Haber H, Bulafka J, Russell A, Clifton R, Zachary J, et al. Impacts of variants of uncertain significance on parental perceptions of children after prenatal chromosome microarray testing. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(10):740–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRefPubMedCentral Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRefPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O'Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208.CrossRefPubMedCentral Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O'Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208.CrossRefPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Carter AS, Briggs-Gowan MJ, Davis NO. Assessment of young children's social-emotional development and psychopathology: recent advances and recommendations for practice. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(1):109–34.CrossRefPubMedCentral Carter AS, Briggs-Gowan MJ, Davis NO. Assessment of young children's social-emotional development and psychopathology: recent advances and recommendations for practice. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(1):109–34.CrossRefPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Condon JT, Corkindale CJ. The assessment of parent-to-infant attachment: Development of a self-report questionnaire instrument. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1998;16(1):57–76.CrossRef Condon JT, Corkindale CJ. The assessment of parent-to-infant attachment: Development of a self-report questionnaire instrument. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1998;16(1):57–76.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Forsyth BW, Horwitz SM, Leventhal JM, Burger J, Leaf PJ. The child vulnerability scale: an instrument to measure parental perceptions of child vulnerability. J Pediatr Psychol. 1996;21(1):89–101.CrossRefPubMedCentral Forsyth BW, Horwitz SM, Leventhal JM, Burger J, Leaf PJ. The child vulnerability scale: an instrument to measure parental perceptions of child vulnerability. J Pediatr Psychol. 1996;21(1):89–101.CrossRefPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference McNair DM. Manual profile of mood states: Educational & Industrial testing service; 1971. McNair DM. Manual profile of mood states: Educational & Industrial testing service; 1971.
25.
go back to reference Gibaud-Wallston J, Wandersman LP. Parenting sense of competence scale. Chicago: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1978. Gibaud-Wallston J, Wandersman LP. Parenting sense of competence scale. Chicago: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1978.
26.
go back to reference Rust J, et al. The golombok rust inventory of marital state (GRIMS). Sex Marital Ther. 1986;1(1):55–60.CrossRef Rust J, et al. The golombok rust inventory of marital state (GRIMS). Sex Marital Ther. 1986;1(1):55–60.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Ashida S, Koehly LM, Roberts JS, Chen CA, Hiraki S, Green RC. Disclosing the disclosure: factors associated with communicating the results of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease. J Health Commun. 2009;14(8):768–84.CrossRefPubMedCentral Ashida S, Koehly LM, Roberts JS, Chen CA, Hiraki S, Green RC. Disclosing the disclosure: factors associated with communicating the results of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease. J Health Commun. 2009;14(8):768–84.CrossRefPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Link BG, Cullen F, Struening E, Shrout P, Dohrenwend B. A modified labeling theory approach to mental disorders: Anempirical assessment. Am Sociol Rev. 1989;54(3):400–23. Link BG, Cullen F, Struening E, Shrout P, Dohrenwend B. A modified labeling theory approach to mental disorders: Anempirical assessment. Am Sociol Rev. 1989;54(3):400–23.
29.
go back to reference Sainfort F, Booske BC. Measuring post-decision satisfaction. Med Decis Mak. 2000;20(1):51–61.CrossRef Sainfort F, Booske BC. Measuring post-decision satisfaction. Med Decis Mak. 2000;20(1):51–61.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference O'Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Mak. 1995;15(1):25–30.CrossRef O'Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Mak. 1995;15(1):25–30.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Mac Donald Jr AP. Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychol Rep. 1970;26(3):791–8.CrossRef Mac Donald Jr AP. Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychol Rep. 1970;26(3):791–8.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Klitzman R, Appelbaum PS, Fyer A, Martinez J, Buquez B, Wynn J, et al. Researchers' views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings. Genet Med. 2013;15(11):888–95.CrossRefPubMedCentral Klitzman R, Appelbaum PS, Fyer A, Martinez J, Buquez B, Wynn J, et al. Researchers' views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings. Genet Med. 2013;15(11):888–95.CrossRefPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Phelan JC. Geneticization of deviant behavior and consequences for stigma: the case of mental illness. J Health Soc Behav. 2005;46(4):307–22.CrossRefPubMedCentral Phelan JC. Geneticization of deviant behavior and consequences for stigma: the case of mental illness. J Health Soc Behav. 2005;46(4):307–22.CrossRefPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Halliday JL, Muller C, Charles T, Norris F, Kennedy J, Lewis S, et al. Offering pregnant women different levels of genetic information from prenatal chromosome microarray: a prospective study. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(4):485–94.CrossRefPubMedCentral Halliday JL, Muller C, Charles T, Norris F, Kennedy J, Lewis S, et al. Offering pregnant women different levels of genetic information from prenatal chromosome microarray: a prospective study. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(4):485–94.CrossRefPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Werner-Lin A, Walser S, Barg FK, Bernhardt BA. "They Can't Find Anything Wrong with Him, Yet": Mothers' experiences of parenting an infant with a prenatally diagnosed copy number variant (CNV). Am J Med Genet A. 2017;173(2):444–51.CrossRefPubMedCentral Werner-Lin A, Walser S, Barg FK, Bernhardt BA. "They Can't Find Anything Wrong with Him, Yet": Mothers' experiences of parenting an infant with a prenatally diagnosed copy number variant (CNV). Am J Med Genet A. 2017;173(2):444–51.CrossRefPubMedCentral
37.
go back to reference Wapner RJ, Zachary J, Clifton R. Change in classification of prenatal microarray analysis copy number variants over time. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:1–26. Wapner RJ, Zachary J, Clifton R. Change in classification of prenatal microarray analysis copy number variants over time. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:1–26.
38.
go back to reference Palmer E, Speirs H, Taylor PJ, Mullan G, Turner G, Einfeld S, et al. Changing interpretation of chromosomal microarray over time in a community cohort with intellectual disability. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164(2):377–85.CrossRef Palmer E, Speirs H, Taylor PJ, Mullan G, Turner G, Einfeld S, et al. Changing interpretation of chromosomal microarray over time in a community cohort with intellectual disability. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164(2):377–85.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Vears DF, Niemiec E, Howard HC, Borry P. Analysis of VUS reporting, variant reinterpretation and recontact policies in clinical genomic sequencing consent forms. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(12):1743–51.CrossRefPubMedCentral Vears DF, Niemiec E, Howard HC, Borry P. Analysis of VUS reporting, variant reinterpretation and recontact policies in clinical genomic sequencing consent forms. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(12):1743–51.CrossRefPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Study protocol: childhood outcomes of fetal genomic variants: the PrenatAL Microarray (PALM) cohort study
Authors
Lisa Hui
Cecilia Pynaker
Joanne Kennedy
Sharon Lewis
David J. Amor
Susan P. Walker
Jane Halliday
On behalf of the PALM cohort study group
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pediatrics / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2431
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-021-02809-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Pediatrics 1/2021 Go to the issue