Meta-analyses, published in 2008-2010, have confirmed abnormally low serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) concentrations in depressed patients and normalization of this by antidepressant treatment. These findings are believed to reflect peripheral manifestations of the neurotrophin hypothesis, which states that depression is secondary to an altered expression of BDNF in the brain. Since the publication of these meta-analyses, the field has seen a huge increase in studies on these topics. This motivated us to update the evidence on the aforementioned associations and, in addition, to compile the data on serum BDNF concentrations in relation to the symptom severity of depression. Using a manifold of data as compared with earlier meta-analyses, we find low serum BDNF concentrations in 2384 antidepressant-free depressed patients relative to 2982 healthy controls and to 1249 antidepressant-treated depressed patients (Cohen's d=-0.71 and -0.56, P-values <0.0000001). When publication bias is accounted for, these effect-sizes become substantially smaller (d=-0.47 and -0.34, respectively, P-values<0.0001). We detect between-study heterogeneity in outcomes for which only year of publication and sample size are significant moderators, with more recent papers and larger samples sizes in general being associated with smaller between-group differences. Finally, the aggregated data negate consistent associations between serum BDNF concentrations and the symptom severity of depression. Our findings corroborate the claim that altered serum BDNF concentrations are peripheral manifestations of depression. However, here we highlight that the evidence for this claim is slimmer as was initially thought and amidst a lot of noise.

The cross-cultural validity of the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ) in the Dutch population has been examined by comparing the psychometric properties and equivalence in factor structure and normative scores of the Dutch OQ with the original American version. Data were collected from a university (n = 268), in a community (n = 810) and from three mental health care organizations (n = 1920). Results show that the psychometric properties of the Dutch OQ were adequate and similar to the original instrument. Some differences in equivalence were found though. In factor analysis, two additional factors were found: one consisting of social role items and another that reflected anxiety and somatic symptoms. Furthermore, normative scores were different for the Dutch and American samples, and this resulted in different cut-off scores for estimating a clinically significant change in the Dutch population.

No abstract

This systematic review shows that a significant proportion of fetuses in a general pregnant population carry a submicroscopic pathogenic CNV. Based on these figures, all women should be informed on their individual risk for all pathogenic chromosomal aberrations and not only for common trisomies. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Introduction:Currently fetal nuchal translucency (NT) ≥3.5 mm is an indication for invasive testing often followed by chromosomal microarray. The aim of this study was to assess the risks for chromosomal aberrations in fetuses with an NT 3.0-3.4 mm, to determine whether invasive prenatal testing would be relevant in these cases and to assess the residual risks in fetuses with normal non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) results. Material and methods:A retrospective study and meta-analysis of literature cases with NT between 3.0 and 3.4 mm and 2 cohorts of pregnant women referred for invasive testing and chromosomal microarray was performed: Rotterdam region (with a risk >1:200 and NT between 3.0 and 3.4 mm) tested in the period Results: A total of 522 fetuses were referred for invasive testing and chromosomal microarray. Meta-analysis indicated that in 1:7.4 (13.5% [95% CI 8.2%-21.5%]) fetuses a chromosomal aberration was diagnosed. Of these aberrant cases, 47/68 (69%) involved trisomy 21, 18, and 13 and would potentially be detected by all NIPT approaches. The residual risk for missing a (sub)microscopic chromosome aberration depends on the NIPT approach and is highest if NIPT was performed only for common trisomies-1:21 (4.8% [95% CI 3.2%-7.3%]). However, it may be substantially lowered if a genome-wide 10-Mb resolution NIPT test was offered (~1:464). Conclusions:Based on these data, we suggest that the NT cut-off for invasive testing could be 3.0 mm (instead of 3.5 mm) because of the high risk of 1:7.4 for a chromosomal aberration. If women were offered NIPT first, there would be a significant diagnostic delay because all abnormal NIPT results need to be confirmed by diagnostic testing. If the woman had already received a normal NIPT result, the residual risk of

Prenatal diagnostics has been impacted by technological changes in the past decade, which have affected the diagnostic yield. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of SNP array and noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) on the diagnostic yield and the number of invasive tests in our center. The frequency of pathogenic fetal unbalanced chromosome aberrations was studied in 10,005 cases referred for prenatal testing in 2009-2015. Chromosomal SNP microarray analysis replaced karyotyping in all invasively tested pregnancies and since 2014 a choice between NIPT and diagnostic testing with microarray was offered to women with an increased risk for common aneuploidy. The introduction of microarray led to an additional yield of submicroscopic pathogenic chromosome aberrations: 3.6% in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies and 1.9% in fetuses without ultrasound anomalies. The introduction of NIPT led to a decrease of invasive tests and of diagnostic yield. Moreover, a diagnostic delay in about 1:350 cases was observed. Since 20%-33% of pathogenic fetal chromosome aberrations are different from the common aneuploidies and triploidy, whole-genome analysis should be offered after invasive sampling. Because NIPT (as a second screening) has led to a decreased diagnostic yield, it should be accompanied by an appropriate pretest counseling.

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the potential diagnostic yield of prenatal whole exome sequencing in fetuses with structural anomalies on expert ultrasound scans and normal chromosomal microarray results. Material and methods: In the period 2013-2016 391 pregnant women with fetal ultrasound anomalies who received normal microarray results, were referred for additional genetic counseling and opted for additional molecular testing pre-and/or postnatally. Most of the couples received only a targeted molecular test and in 159 cases (40.7%) whole exome sequencing (broad gene panels or open exome) was performed. The results of these molecular tests were evaluated retrospectively, regardless of the time of the genetic diagnosis (pre-or postnatal). Results: In 76 of 391 fetuses (19.4%, 95% CI 15.8-23.6%) molecular testing provided a genetic diagnosis with identification of (likely) pathogenic variants. In the majority of cases (91.1%, (73/76) the (likely) pathogenic variant would be detected by prenatal whole exome sequencing analysis. Conclusions: Our retrospective cohort study shows that prenatal whole exome sequencing, if offered by a clinical geneticist, in addition to chromosomal microarray, would notably increase the diagnostic yield in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies and would allow early diagnosis of a genetic disorder irrespective of the (incomplete) fetal phenotype.

No abstract