Search

Gene fusions have been discussed in the scientific literature since they were first detected in cancer cells in the early 1980s. There is currently no standardized way to denote the genes involved in fusions, but in the majority of publications the gene symbols in question are listed either separated by a hyphen (-) or by a forward slash (/). Both types of designation suffer from important shortcomings. HGNC has worked with the scientific community to determine a new, instantly recognizable and unique separator-a double colon (::)-to be used in the description of fusion genes, and advocates its usage in all databases and articles describing gene fusions., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Participation of clinical genetic laboratories in External Quality Assessment schemes (EQAs) is a powerful method to ascertain if any improvement or additional training is required in the diagnostic service. Here, we provide evidence from recent EQAs that the competence in recognizing and interpreting cytogenetic aberrations is variable and could impact patient management. We identify several trends that could affect cytogenomic competence. Firstly, as a result of the age distribution among clinical laboratory geneticists (CLGs) registered at the European Board of Medical Genetics, about 25-30% of those with experience in cytogenetics will retire during the next decade. At the same time, there are about twice as many molecular geneticists to cytogeneticists among the younger CLGs. Secondly, when surveying training programs for CLG, we observed that not all programs guarantee that candidates gather sufficient experience in clinical cytogenomics. Thirdly, we acknowledge that whole genome sequencing (WGS) has a great attraction to biomedical scientists that wish to enter a training program for CLG. This, with a larger number of positions available, makes a choice for specialization in molecular genetics logical. However, current WGS technology cannot provide a diagnosis in all cases. Understanding the etiology of chromosomal rearrangements is essential for appropriate follow-up and for ascertaining recurrence risks. We define the minimal knowledge a CLG should have about cytogenomics in a world dominated by WGS, and discuss how laboratory directors and boards of professional organizations in clinical genetics can uphold cytogenomic competence by providing adequate CLG training programs and attracting sufficient numbers of trainees.

Cytogenomic investigations of haematological neoplasms, including chromosome banding analysis, fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) and microarray analyses have become increasingly important in the clinical management of patients with haematological neoplasms. The widespread implementation of these techniques in genetic diagnostics has highlighted the need for guidance on the essential criteria to follow when providing cytogenomic testing, regardless of choice of methodology. These recommendations provide an updated, practical and easily available document that will assist laboratories in the choice of testing and methodology enabling them to operate within acceptable standards and maintain a quality service.

Objective: To ensure accurate and appropriate reporting of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results, the standard of testing should be measured and monitored by participation in external quality assessment (EQA) schemes. The findings from international pilot EQAs for NIPT for the common trisomies are presented., Methods: In the first pilot, three EQA providers used artificially manufactured reference materials to deliver an EQA for NIPT. The second pilot used clinically collected maternal plasma samples. The testing and reporting for aneuploidy status was performed by participating laboratories using routine procedures. Reports were assessed against peer ratified criteria and EQA scores were returned to participants., Results: Forty laboratories participated in the first. Genotyping accuracy was high; four laboratories reported a critical genotyping error (10%) and two reported partial results. Eighty seven laboratories participated in the second pilot using maternal plasma, two reporting a critical genotyping error (2.3%). For both rounds, report content was variable with key information frequently omitted or difficult to identify within the report., Conclusions: We have successfully delivered an international pilot EQA for NIPT. When compared with currently available manufactured materials, EQA for NIPT was best performed using clinically collected maternal plasma. Work is required to define and improve the standard of reporting., (© 2019 The Authors Prenatal Diagnosis Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 13, 18 and 21 is used worldwide. Laboratory reports should provide clear, concise results with test limitations indicated, yet no national or local guidelines are currently available. Here, we aim to present minimum best practice guidelines., Methods: All laboratories registered in the three European quality assurance schemes for molecular and cytogenetics were invited to complete an online survey focused on services provided for NIPT and non-invasive prenatal diagnosis. Laboratories delivering NIPT for aneuploidy were asked to submit two example reports; one high and one low risk result. Reports were reviewed for content and discussed at a meeting of laboratory providers and clinicians held at the ISPD 2016 conference in Berlin., Results: Of the 122 laboratories that responded, 50 issued reports for NIPT and 43 of these submitted sample reports. Responses and reports were discussed by 72 attendees at the meeting. Consensus opinion was determined in several areas and used to develop best practice guidelines for reporting of NIPT results., Conclusions: Across Europe, there is considerable variation in reporting NIPT results. Here, we describe minimum best practice guidelines, which will be distributed to European laboratories, and reports audited in subsequent external quality assurance cycles. © 2017 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (© 2017 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

A standardized nomenclature is critical for the accurate and consistent description of genomic changes as identified by karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization and microarray. The International System for Human Cytogenomic Nomenclature (ISCN) is the central reference for the description of karyotyping, FISH, and microarray results, and provides rules for describing cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic findings in laboratory reports. These laboratory reports are documents to the referring clinician, and should be clear, accurate and contain all information relevant for good interpretation of the cytogenetic findings. Here, we describe guidelines for cytogenetic nomenclature and laboratory reports for cytogenetic testing applied to tumor samples.

In 2013, the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) examined the issue of incidental findings in whole exome and whole genome sequencing, and introduced recommendations to search for, evaluate and report medically actionable variants in a set of 56 genes. At a debate held during the 2014 European Society for Human Genetics Conference (ESHG) in Milan, Italy, the first author of that paper presented this view in a debate session that did not end with a conclusive vote from the mainly European audience for or against reporting back actionable incidental findings. In this meeting report, we elaborate on the discussions held during a special meeting hosted at the ESHG in 2013 from posing the question 'How to reach a (European) consensus on reporting incidental findings and unclassified variants in diagnostic next generation sequencing'. We ask whether an European consensus exists on the reporting of incidental findings in genome diagnostics, and present a series of key issues that require discussion at both a national and European level in order to develop recommendations for handling incidental findings and unclassified variants in line with the legal and cultural particularities of individual European member states.

Genetic test results can have considerable importance for patients, their parents and more remote family members. Clinical therapy and surveillance, reproductive decisions and genetic diagnostics in family members, including prenatal diagnosis, are based on these results. The genetic test report should therefore provide a clear, concise, accurate, fully interpretative and authoritative answer to the clinical question. The need for harmonizing reporting practice of genetic tests has been recognised by the External Quality Assessment (EQA), providers and laboratories. The ESHG Genetic Services Quality Committee has produced reporting guidelines for the genetic disciplines (biochemical, cytogenetic and molecular genetic). These guidelines give assistance on report content, including the interpretation of results. Selected examples of genetic test reports for all three disciplines are provided in an annexe.

The latest edition of the International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature, ISCN 2013, has recently been published following a thorough revision of the 2009 issue and the incorporation of suggestions from the community by the current standing committee. This review will highlight the multiple nomenclature changes in the respective chapters of the 2013 version compared to the previous version of the ISCN published in 2009. These highlights are meant as a guide for the cytogeneticist to assist in the transition in the use of this updated nomenclature for describing cytogenetic and molecular cytogenetic findings in both clinical and research reports.

Over the last three decades, cytogenetic analysis of malignancies has become an integral part of disease evaluation and prediction of prognosis or responsiveness to therapy. In most diagnostic laboratories, conventional karyotyping, in conjunction with targeted fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis, is routinely performed to detect recurrent aberrations with prognostic implications. However, the genetic complexity of cancer cells requires a sensitive genome-wide analysis, enabling the detection of small genomic changes in a mixed cell population, as well as of regions of homozygosity. The advent of comprehensive high-resolution genomic tools, such as molecular karyotyping using comparative genomic hybridization or single-nucleotide polymorphism microarrays, has overcome many of the limitations of traditional cytogenetic techniques and has been used to study complex genomic lesions in, for example, leukemia. The clinical impact of the genomic copy-number and copy-neutral alterations identified by microarray technologies is growing rapidly and genome-wide array analysis is evolving into a diagnostic tool, to better identify high-risk patients and predict patients' outcomes from their genomic profiles. Here, we review the added clinical value of an array-based genome-wide screen in leukemia, and discuss the technical challenges and an interpretation workflow in applying arrays in the acquired cytogenetic diagnostic setting., (© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Whole-genome analysis using genome-wide arrays, also called "genomic arrays," "microarrays," or "arrays," has become the first-tier diagnostic test for patients with developmental abnormalities and/or intellectual disabilities. In addition to constitutional anomalies, genomic arrays are also used to diagnose acquired disorders. Despite the rapid implementation of these technologies in diagnostic laboratories, external quality control schemes (such as CEQA, EMQN, UK NEQAS, and the USA QA scheme CAP) and interlaboratory comparisons show that there are huge differences in quality, interpretation, and reporting among laboratories. We offer guidance to laboratories to help assure the quality of array experiments and to standardize minimum detection resolution, and we also provide guidelines to standardize interpretation and reporting., (© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Quality control in a laboratory setting requires the establishment of effective training, standard operating procedures, internal quality control, validation of tests and external quality assessment (EQA). A structured quality management system subject to regular internal and external audits will minimise the error rate. EQA, therefore, gives assurance, both to patients and referring clinicians, that the diagnostic laboratory is competent to produce results that are reliable and accurate. EQA is educational and aims to improve and validate the overall quality of genetic service to the user. Regular EQA assessment compares laboratory performance against set standards and also allows comparison between laboratories. Sometimes EQA can also help to define good standards (best practice), although this does depend on the type of EQA test. EQA interprets best practice standards (=quality) into a numerical score (=quantity). While international bodies or professional organisations set these standards, EQA is able to assess whether these standards are met, with any omissions resulting in a reduction in the total score. Although EQA has an educational role rather than a punitive role, critical errors affecting clinical management will result in a laboratory receiving a poor performance categorisation. Accurate analysis and interpretation are essential quality parameters that require extensive knowledge of the aetiology of genetic abnormalities/disease and risk factors. Training of staff in interpretation of the results together with a comprehensive means of reporting normal and abnormal genetic results underpins the diagnostic service to the patient. Poor-performing laboratories are, therefore, encouraged to review their internal processes. EQA schemes that have been established for many years have seen improvements in the analytical and reporting content over time, thereby improving the quality of diagnostic service available to patients.

A novel approach to external quality assessment (EQA) using the Internet mimics the diagnostic situation so that multiple tests can be requested and EQA cases can be 'tailor made' to address a specific chromosome syndrome, disease, or clinical dilemma. The web-based EQA system was trialled on a large UK EQA scheme, UK NEQAS for Clinical Cytogenetics. It has also been used to implement a new Cytogenetics European Quality Assessment scheme, CEQA, set up with the intention of providing laboratories in countries without access to a local EQA scheme the opportunity of participation in EQA. Overall, Internet-based EQA allows for a varied EQA programme. Poor performance was detected in both CEQA and UK NEQAS constitutional EQA schemes and also in the UK NEQAS oncology EQA scheme. The Internet-based EQA overcomes submission delays due to international surface mail. There is also a reduction in administration and assessors' time compared to a retrospective EQA involving the submission of unique cases for EQA assessment, as participants analyse the same three Internet-based EQA cases simultaneously. Many EU27 (EU member states) laboratories still do not participate in their national EQA schemes, so until EQA participation becomes mandatory as a component of compulsory laboratory accreditation, the quality of laboratory diagnostic service is unpredictable.

The results of screening for the common aneuploidies involving chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y by florescent in-situ hybridisation (FISH) in direct preparations from 100 chorionic villus samples from pregnancies between 10 and 20 weeks' gestation are reported. Samples prepared using routine methods and analysed with commercially available probes, accurately detected 12 cases of fetal aneuploidy, all referred because of developmental abnormality. Three of the four cases where chromosome abnormality was detected in cultured villi but not by the direct fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) assay, were due to confined placental mosaicism. No chromosomal anomalies were found in the 20 low risk cases where the referral reason was a familial single gene disorder. We conclude that the FISH assay with commercial probes may act as an accurate and less labour intensive alternative to direct chromosome analysis of chorionic villus samples. In cytogenetically low risk cases its use can obtain a result within the time needed for DNA analysis and avoid the need to set up cultures.

We describe a family in which non-syndromic mental retardation (MR) and an apparently balanced reciprocal translocation, t(1;17)(p36. 3;p11.2) segregates in eight individuals over three generations. Four children showed psychomotor developmental delay, reduced muscle tone, poor coordination, and learning difficulties. The affected adults had a varying range of behavioral problems and difficulties in social adjustment but no abnormal neurological signs. Most of them were functioning at the borderline learning difficulty level in intellectual abilities with additional specific difficulties in reading in two individuals. The Smith-Magenis and 1p36.3 deletion syndromes were excluded. We propose that this reciprocal translocation has disrupted an autosomal gene with an important function in cognitive development, and this family represents a unique resource for the molecular genetic study on non-syndromic MR., (Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

We present 16 cases, 10 de novo and 6 familial, in which extra structurally abnormal chromosomes (ESACs) were diagnosed prenatally and identified by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies with follow up from birth. We review the literature on prenatally diagnosed ESACs arising de novo and suggest a management protocol for these cases.

Karyotyping of a fetus with mild cerebral ventriculomegaly detected with ultrasound at 23 weeks revealed two apparently balanced structural rearrangements in mosaic form. Using conventional cytogenetics and FISH, the chromosomal constitution was identified as 46,XX,t(3;10)(p13;q21.1),inv(6)(p23q12)/46,XX. A 46,XX chromosome constitution was predominantly present in the skin whereas in the fetal blood the cell line with two balanced chromosome rearrangements was selectively retained. To the best of our knowledge this is the first prenatal case of mosaicism for two de novo balanced structural chromosome rearrangements to be reported.

To study heterogeneity in a cell line derived from a human bladder carcinoma (EJ), 7 clones were isolated at low passage and examined for differences in culture behaviour, ability to grow in agar and tumorigenicity in nude mice. The parent EJ line had several distinct chromosome populations (both diploid and tetraploid), grew in agar and produced tumours in nude mice. Three of the clones had pseudodiploid modes and 4 had either hypo- or hypertetraploid modes. The 7 clones had 5 marker chromosomes in common but the combination of other marker chromosomes made each clone unique. No significant difference was found between the clones in the in vitro growth rate although analysis of in vitro culture behaviour showed heterogeneity in the pattern of cell movement on plastic substratum. Three clones were composed of static cells, one clone had very mobile cells; the other clones had rates of movement intermediate between the two. Differences were also found in the packing density of the cloned cells and in the cell size. All 7 clones grew in agar but heterogeneity was seen between the clones as shown by widely varying colony-forming efficiencies (0.5-13%). One clone had a high colony-forming ability in agar but failed to produce tumours in nude mice. The other clones were tumorigenic regardless of colony-forming efficiency in agar. Specific chromosome abnormalities were found to be associated with growth in agar and tumorigenicity but not with the growth pattern or the rate of movement of the cloned cells in culture.

Four human bladder carcinoma cell lines have been characterized by G-banding, and the chromosomal patterns correlated to growth in agar and tumorigenicity in nude mice. Each cell line was shown to be chromosomally unique and although numerical and structural anomalies were present, none were common to all four cell lines. However, one or more copies of a structurally altered chromosome 8 were present in all four cell lines and may be associated with tumorigenicity in nude mice. A combination of three marker chromosomes was found in the more anaplastic cell lines, but not in the two well-differentiated tumour cell lines. Growth in agar may be associated with the presence of the three marker chromosomes but was not correlated with tumorigenicity in nude mice.