Using array comparative genome hybridisation (CGH) 41 de novo reciprocal translocations and 18 de novo complex chromosome rearrangements (CCRs) were screened. All cases had been interpreted as “balanced” by conventional cytogenetics. In all, 27 cases of reciprocal translocations were detected in patients with an abnormal phenotype, and after array CGH analysis, 11 were found to be unbalanced. Thus 40% (11 of 27) of patients with a “chromosomal phenotype” and an apparently balanced translocation were in fact unbalanced, and 18% (5 of 27) of the reciprocal translocations were instead complex rearrangements with >3 breakpoints. Fourteen fetuses with de novo, apparently balanced translocations, all but two with normal ultrasound findings, were also analysed and all were found to be normal using array CGH. Thirteen CCRs were detected in patients with abnormal phenotypes, two in women who had experienced repeated spontaneous abortions and three in fetuses. Sixteen patients were found to have unbalanced mutations, with up to 4 deletions. These results suggest that genome-wide array CGH may be advisable in all carriers of “balanced” CCRs. The parental origin of the deletions was investigated in 5 reciprocal translocations and 11 CCRs; all were found to be paternal. Using customised platforms in seven cases of CCRs, the deletion breakpoints were narrowed down to regions of a few hundred base pairs in length. No susceptibility motifs were associated with the imbalances. These results show that the phenotypic abnormalities of apparently balanced de novo CCRs are mainly due to cryptic deletions and that spermatogenesis is more prone to generate multiple chaotic chromosome imbalances and reciprocal translocations than oogenesis.

Over the past years, noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal aneuploidy detection has become a clinical reality.¹ Most NIPT providers focus on the detection of only the most common aneuploidies, trisomies 21, 18, and 13. However, random genome sequencing not only enables the detection of the viable fetal trisomies but also other chromosomal aneuploidies and even segmental fetal imbalances.^2,3 Applying a similar large parallel sequencing approach to plasma-derived DNA from patients with cancer has recently been shown to detect tumor-associated copy number profiles in selected tumors prone to copy number changes.^4-6 We optimized a large parallel sequencing–based NIPT dataset and analysis, which not only interrogates the common trisomies but also allows the genomewide discrimination of fetal and maternal segmental aneuploidies.³

Large-scale analysis of balanced chromosomal translocation breakpoints has shown nonhomologous end joining and microhomology-mediated repair to be the main drivers of interchromosomal structural aberrations. Breakpoint sequences of de novo unbalanced translocations have not yet been investigated systematically. We analyzed 12 de novo unbalanced translocations and mapped the breakpoints in nine. Surprisingly, in contrast to balanced translocations, we identify nonallelic homologous recombination (NAHR) between (retro)transposable elements and especially long interspersed elements (LINEs) as the main mutational mechanism. This finding shows yet another involvement of (retro)transposons in genomic rearrangements and exposes a profoundly different mutational mechanism compared with balanced chromosomal translocations. Furthermore, we show the existence of compound maternal/paternal derivative chromosomes, reinforcing the hypothesis that human cleavage stage embryogenesis is a cradle of chromosomal rearrangements.

Key points: What is already known about this topic? In 2015, the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD) published its first position statement on the use of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to screen for aneuploidy. Widespread uptake across the globe and subsequent published research has shed new light on test performance and implementation issues. What does this study add? This new position statement replaces the 2015 statement with updated information on the current technologies, clinical experience, and implementation practices. As an international organization, ISPD recognizes that there are important population‐specific considerations in the organization of prenatal screening and diagnosis. These opinions are designed to apply to high income settings where prenatal screening for aneuploidy is an established part of antenatal care. This position statement is not a clinical practice guideline but represents the consensus opinion of the current ISPD Board based on the current state of knowledge and clinical practice.