[Analysis of false-negative cases by Optical genome mapping and a literature review]

To explore the reasons for false negative results by Optical genome mapping (OGM) analysis of three cases and propose strategies for handling them.

Three patients presented at the Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University between July 2022 and July 2024 were selected as study subjects. The patients included a 37-year-old female with two miscarriages, a 1.5-year-old boy with delayed motor development, and a 35-year-old male whose son had intellectual disability. The patients had undergone comprehensive evaluation with chromosomal karyotyping analysis, single nucleotide polymorphism microarray (SNP array) assay, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and methylation-specific multiple ligation-dependent probe amplification (MS-MLPA). A retrospective analysis was also carried out on the results of OGM testing. This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Hospital (Ethics No.: 2020-K004).

The chromosomal karyotype of patient 1 was 46,XX,4qs, and no abnormality was found by SNP array, FISH, and OGM testing. Patient 2 had a normal chromosomal karyotype, and SNP array analysis did not reveal any copy number abnormalities of chromosomal fragments but the presence of a homozygous region of approximately 79.58 Mb at 15q11.2-q26.3 (chr15: 22817871_102397317). MS-MLPA detection indicated that the copy number of the 15q11.2-q13 region was 2, and the degree of methylation was relatively high (average ratio = 1.0). OGM detection confirmed the presence of approximately 67.97 Mb of homozygosity in the chr15:33814680_101787650 [hg38] region of 15q14-q26.3. Patient 3 had a chromosomal karyotype of 46,XY,t(9;14)(q13;q11.2). No abnormality was found by OGM testing for patients 1 and 3.

As a novel cytogenetic technique, OGM can achieve high-resolution and high-precision analysis for numerical and structural genomic abnormalities. Nevertheless, it also has certain limitations, as its false negative results are related to factors such as the type of genomic variation, the chromosomal regions involved in the variation, the type of disease, and the version of human reference genome. Currently, it cannot be used as an independent method for the diagnosis of genetic diseases.