CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT04814563Updated Apr 6, 2021

Evaluation of the Relevance of Comparative Genomic Hybridization in Prenatal Diagnosis

An observational study in Comparative Genomic Hybridization, sponsored by Central Hospital, Nancy, France. Status unknown at 1 site in France. Open to female participants. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-04-06.

Sponsored by Central Hospital, Nancy, France · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Apr 2021), so the status shown — last known as Enrolling by invitation — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
830
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

Pre-natal diagnosis is developing nowadays thanks to the improvement of ultrasound performances but also of genetic analysis techniques.

The karyotype was previously the reference technique for genetic analysis. The development of comparative genomic hybridization, consisting of comparative genomic hybridization on DNA sequences and allowing the diagnosis of unbalanced chromosomal rearrangements, has made it possible to increase the resolution threshold for the detection of genetic anomalies. This technique can be performed both pre and post natal. In pre-natal, the indications for this genetic study are based on ultrasound signs and are regularly updated in the international literature. Due to the complete analysis of the genome and the increase of the resolution threshold, genetic anomalies not related to the detected ultrasound pathology may be discovered and may pose ethical problems from a genetic counseling point of view.

To date, the diagnostic performance of comparative genomic hybridization as a complement to karyotype is being confirmed and needs to be clarified in order to limit the risk of incidental discovery of genetic anomalies whose significance remains unknown.

Through the study that the investigator would like to carry out, the investigator seek to evaluate the diagnostic contribution of this comparative genomic hybridization technique compared to the data provided by the karyotype according to the various ultrasound call signs on the Nancy cohort of files presented to the multidisciplinary pre-natal diagnosis committee, since the launch of the comparative genomic hybridization in Nancy in 2012 until 2018.

02

Conditions studied

  • Comparative Genomic Hybridization

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Prenatal diagnosis
  • Ultrasound sign
03

In context

Disease

1,327 studies on the registry are indexed under Disease; 596 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 830 is above the median of 215 across 573 observational studies indexed under Disease.

Browse Disease studies →

Lead sponsor

Central Hospital, Nancy, France is the lead sponsor of 778 studies on the registry; 183 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

All patients who underwent amniocentesis or chorionic villus puncture during their pregnancy due to ultrasound call sign with CGH-array performed at the Nancy University Hospital genetics laboratory

Inclusion criteria

  • CGH-array performed for ultrasound findings at the genetic laboratory of the Nancy University Hospital from 01/10/2012 to 31/12/2018
  • Results of the CGH-array presented to the multidisciplinary pre-natal diagnosis committee of Nancy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • patients who objected to the use of their data for research purposes when signing the informed consent form given during the genetic consultation
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
830 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. CGH-array abnormality

    An anomaly will be detected at CGH-array if its size is greater than or equal to 500 Kb. Size of these anomalies will be considered in a binary manner: \< 10 Mb (i.e. not visible on karyotype) and ≥ 10 Mb (i.e. visible on karyotype)

    Time frame: baseline

Secondary outcomes

  1. Type of ultrasound call sign

    The ultrasound signs will be defined by the ultrasound technician thanks to the recommended classification

    Time frame: baseline

  2. Genotype-phenotype concordance

    The genotype-phenotype concordance is defined by the cytogeneticist who delivers the results, according to the current scientific knowledge described in the literature

    Time frame: baseline

  3. Particular gravity

    The particular gravity (Yes/No) of the ultrasound sign is defined after consultation between the various health professionals gathered at the multidisciplinary pre-natal diagnosis committee (gynaecologist, paediatrician, geneticist, radiologist, histopathologists, surgeons, etc.).

    Time frame: baseline

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Nancy University Hospital
    Nancy, 54000, France
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Rudolf G, Lovrecic L, Tul N, Teran N, Peterlin B. The frequency of CNVs in a cohort population of consecutive fetuses with congenital anomalies after the termination of pregnancy. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2019 Jun;7(6):e658. doi: 10.1002/mgg3.658. Epub 2019 Apr 19. PubMed 31004418 ↗
  • Stosic M, Levy B, Wapner R. The Use of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in Prenatal Diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2018 Mar;45(1):55-68. doi: 10.1016/j.ogc.2017.10.002. Epub 2017 Dec 9. PubMed 29428286 ↗
  • Lo JO, Shaffer BL, Feist CD, Caughey AB. Chromosomal microarray analysis and prenatal diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2014 Oct;69(10):613-21. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000119. PubMed 25336071 ↗
  • Lee CN, Lin SY, Lin CH, Shih JC, Lin TH, Su YN. Clinical utility of array comparative genomic hybridisation for prenatal diagnosis: a cohort study of 3171 pregnancies. BJOG. 2012 Apr;119(5):614-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03279.x. Epub 2012 Feb 7. PubMed 22313859 ↗
  • Wou K, Levy B, Wapner RJ. Chromosomal Microarrays for the Prenatal Detection of Microdeletions and Microduplications. Clin Lab Med. 2016 Jun;36(2):261-76. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2016.01.017. Epub 2016 Mar 28. PubMed 27235911 ↗
  • Levy B, Wapner R. Prenatal diagnosis by chromosomal microarray analysis. Fertil Steril. 2018 Feb;109(2):201-212. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.005. PubMed 29447663 ↗
  • Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, Savage M, Platt LD, Saltzman D, Grobman WA, Klugman S, Scholl T, Simpson JL, McCall K, Aggarwal VS, Bunke B, Nahum O, Patel A, Lamb AN, Thom EA, Beaudet AL, Ledbetter DH, Shaffer LG, Jackson L. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2175-84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1203382. PubMed 23215555 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 6, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04814563
Lead sponsor
Central Hospital, Nancy, France
Responsible party
PERDRIOLLE-GALET Estelle (Doctor, Central Hospital, Nancy, France) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 24, 2021
Start date
Mar 30, 2021
Primary completion
Apr 2021 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 2021 (estimated)
Last update
Apr 6, 2021

Study contacts

Estelle PERDRIOLLE-GALET, Doctor
principal investigator · Central Hospital, Nancy, France

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Apr 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion