Copy Number Variations in Spontaneous Abortions: a Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal J Assist Reprod Genet

Publisher Springer

Specialties Genetics
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2025 Feb 28

PMID 40019700

Authors

Gleb V Drozdov

Anna A Kashevarova

Igor N Lebedev

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The goal of this study was to analyze copy number variations (CNVs) in spontaneous abortions with a euploid karyotype, irrespective of the method used for CNV detection. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Articles published between 2006 and 2023 were selected through the PubMed database. Studies were included if they involved CNV analysis in spontaneous abortions using any CNV detection method. The pathogenic significance of CNVs was interpreted based on the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guidelines. Nineteen publications met the inclusion criteria. A total of 1425 CNVs were identified in 550 samples from 3953 euploid spontaneous abortions, representing 14% of the cases. Among the detected CNVs, 9% were classified as pathogenic, and 7.5% were likely pathogenic. The most frequently observed pathogenic CNVs included 22q11.2 deletion/duplication, 16p13.11 deletion, 15q11.2 deletion/duplication, 1p36.33 duplication, and 17p13.3 duplication. The genomic regions with the highest frequency of CNVs, regardless of their pathogenic effect, were 8q24.3, 16p13.3, 21q22.3, Xp22.33, Xp22.31, and Xq28. No clear associations were found between specific CNVs and pregnancy loss. However, deletions in the 22q11.2 region emerged as the most likely candidates contributing to lethality during the early stages of embryonic development.

References

Nikitina T, Lebedev I . [Cytogenetics of recurrent pregnancy loss]. Genetika. 2015; 50(5):501-14. View

Stephenson M, Awartani K, Robinson W . Cytogenetic analysis of miscarriages from couples with recurrent miscarriage: a case-control study. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(2):446-51. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.2.446. View

Sahoo T, Dzidic N, Strecker M, Commander S, Travis M, Doherty C . Comprehensive genetic analysis of pregnancy loss by chromosomal microarrays: outcomes, benefits, and challenges. Genet Med. 2016; 19(1):83-89. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.69. View

Soler A, Morales C, Mademont-Soler I, Margarit E, Borrell A, Borobio V . Overview of Chromosome Abnormalities in First Trimester Miscarriages: A Series of 1,011 Consecutive Chorionic Villi Sample Karyotypes. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2017; 152(2):81-89. DOI: 10.1159/000477707. View

Dhillon R, Hillman S, Morris R, McMullan D, Williams D, Coomarasamy A . Additional information from chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) over conventional karyotyping when diagnosing chromosomal abnormalities in miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2013; 121(1):11-21. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12382. View

Pauta M, Grande M, Rodriguez-Revenga L, Kolomietz E, Borrell A . Added value of chromosomal microarray analysis over karyotyping in early pregnancy loss: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 51(4):453-462. DOI: 10.1002/uog.18929. View

Peng G, Zhou Q, Chai H, Wen J, Zhao H, Taylor H . Estimation on risk of spontaneous abortions by genomic disorders from a meta-analysis of microarray results on large case series of pregnancy losses. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2023; 11(8):e2181. PMC: 10422064. DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.2181. View

Kuleshov M, Jones M, Rouillard A, Fernandez N, Duan Q, Wang Z . Enrichr: a comprehensive gene set enrichment analysis web server 2016 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016; 44(W1):W90-7. PMC: 4987924. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkw377. View

Shimokawa O, Harada N, Miyake N, Satoh K, Mizuguchi T, Niikawa N . Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis in first-trimester spontaneous abortions with 'normal' karyotypes. Am J Med Genet A. 2006; 140(18):1931-5. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31421. View

10.

Warren J, Turok D, Maxwell T, Brothman A, Silver R . Array comparative genomic hybridization for genetic evaluation of fetal loss between 10 and 20 weeks of gestation. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 114(5):1093-1102. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bc6ab0. View

11.

Rajcan-Separovic E, Qiao Y, Tyson C, Harvard C, Fawcett C, Kalousek D . Genomic changes detected by array CGH in human embryos with developmental defects. Mol Hum Reprod. 2009; 16(2):125-34. DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gap083. View

12.

Rajcan-Separovic E, Diego-Alvarez D, Robinson W, Tyson C, Qiao Y, Harvard C . Identification of copy number variants in miscarriages from couples with idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss. Hum Reprod. 2010; 25(11):2913-22. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq202. View

13.

Robberecht C, Pexsters A, Deprest J, Fryns J, DHooghe T, Vermeesch J . Cytogenetic and morphological analysis of early products of conception following hystero-embryoscopy from couples with recurrent pregnancy loss. Prenat Diagn. 2012; 32(10):933-42. DOI: 10.1002/pd.3936. View

14.

Viaggi C, Cavani S, Malacarne M, Floriddia F, Zerega G, Baldo C . First-trimester euploid miscarriages analysed by array-CGH. J Appl Genet. 2013; 54(3):353-9. DOI: 10.1007/s13353-013-0157-x. View

15.

Kudesia R, Li M, Smith J, Patel A, Williams Z . Rescue karyotyping: a case series of array-based comparative genomic hybridization evaluation of archival conceptual tissue. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014; 12:19. PMC: 3996014. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7827-12-19. View

16.

Liu S, Song L, Cram D, Xiong L, Wang K, Wu R . Traditional karyotyping vs copy number variation sequencing for detection of chromosomal abnormalities associated with spontaneous miscarriage. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 46(4):472-7. DOI: 10.1002/uog.14849. View

17.

Kasak L, Rull K, Sober S, Laan M . Copy number variation profile in the placental and parental genomes of recurrent pregnancy loss families. Sci Rep. 2017; 7:45327. PMC: 5366903. DOI: 10.1038/srep45327. View

18.

Sato T, Migita O, Hata H, Okamoto A, Hata K . Analysis of chromosome microstructures in products of conception associated with recurrent miscarriage. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 38(5):787-795. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.12.010. View

19.

Li H, Liu M, Xie M, Zhang Q, Xiang J, Duan C . Submicroscopic chromosomal imbalances contribute to early abortion. Mol Cytogenet. 2018; 11:41. PMC: 6054741. DOI: 10.1186/s13039-018-0386-0. View

20.

Wang Y, Li Y, Chen Y, Zhou R, Sang Z, Meng L . Systematic analysis of copy-number variations associated with early pregnancy loss. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 55(1):96-104. DOI: 10.1002/uog.20412. View