Search

Aim: We aimed to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in high‐risk pregnant women. Methods: Pregnant women who underwent GeneTech NIPT, the most commonly used NIPT in Japan, between January 2015 and March 2019, at Japan NIPT Consortium medical sites were recruited for this study. The exclusion criteria were as follows: pregnant women with missing survey items, multiple pregnancy/vanishing twins, chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus other than the NIPT target disease, and nonreportable NIPT results. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated from the obtained data, and maternal age‐specific PPV and NPV were estimated. Results: Of the 45 504 cases, 44 263 cases fulfilling the study criteria were included. The mean maternal age and gestational weeks at the time of procedure were 38.5 years and 13.1 weeks, respectively. Sensitivities were 99.78% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 98.78–99.96), 99.12% (95% CI: 96.83–99.76), and 100% (95% CI: 88.30–100) for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, respectively. Specificities were more than 99.9% for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, respectively. Maternal age‐specific PPVs were more than 93%, 77%, and 43% at the age of 35 years for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, respectively. Conclusion: The GeneTech NIPT data showed high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in high‐risk pregnant women, and maternal age‐specific PPVs were obtained. These results could provide more accurate and improved information regarding NIPT for genetic counseling in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim In order to investigate the current status of prenatal testing for genetic disorders, we conducted a multicenter retrospective questionnaire survey. Methods The questionnaire was sent to 105 facilities with genetic counseling systems. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: (i) the number of prenatal tests conducted for genetic disorders from January 2010 to December 2012, whether the laboratory was combined with the counseling facility or separate, the sampling procedure method, the testing results, and the outcomes of the affected fetus in addition to treatment; and (ii) a survey of personal comments regarding prenatal testing for genetic disorders. Results We received responses from 69 of the 105 facilities (65.7%), and genetic testing was performed at 26 of these facilities. Nucleic acid sequential testing was performed on 45 disorders and 252 cases during a three-year period. There were 67 cases of affected fetuses. Six cases continued pregnancy and were treated. The comment survey highlighted difficulties in locating a laboratory to assess prenatal samples, as well as inadequate counseling and preparation for genetic disorders. Conclusions Our study revealed that a number of prenatal testing for genetic disorders are conducted in Japan; however, it is difficult for counselors to locate a laboratory capable of testing for specific genetic disorders. Inadequate counseling and healthcare providers' lack of knowledge is a current problem. A well-established system of prenatal testing for genetic disorders and the further education of general physicians is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined how clients' selection and preference for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy changed with genetic counseling (GC) performed by certified geneticists at a primary hospital specializing in obstetrics, where other multiple prenatal genetic tests options were available. Methods: A total of 334 couples who underwent GC between 2017 and 2019 were included in the study. The average age of the pregnant women who underwent GC was 35.1 years. Results: Among the 95 couples (28.4%) who wanted NIPT at the start of GC, 10 (10.5%) switched to other tests, and 4 (4.2%) chose not to undergo any test. Among the 106 (31.7%) couples who wanted the combination of ultrasonography and the serum marker test, 12 (11.3%) chose not to undergo the test. Among the 92 (27.5%) couples who were undecided before GC, 21 (22.8%) wanted NIPT, 31 (33.7%) selected combined tests, and 18 (19.6%) did not undergo any test. Conclusion: We have demonstrated the significance of GC before prenatal genetic testing under widespread use of NIPT. Ideally, obstetric facilities should provide GC, or at least, pre‐counseling at their own facilities, and offer multiple prenatal genetic testing options or refer to other facilities for the same. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim This retrospective study was performed to determine the frequency of malformed infants born at a tertiary center in Hokkaido, Japan. The accuracy of prenatal diagnosis rates was also investigated. Methods An observational study was performed using data of 1509 and 1743 newborn infants at a single center during two study periods, 2005-2009 (first) and 2010-2014 (second), respectively. Cases including minor anomalies (accessory auricle, nevus and fistula auris congenita) were not included. Results In total, 274 and 569 malformations were identified in 191 and 337 newborn infants in the first and second study periods, respectively. The number of malformed infants increased significantly over time (13% [191/1509] vs 19% [337/1743], respectively; P < 0.001), mainly as a result of an increase in cases of congenital heart disease (CHD), from 59 to 141 (31% [59/191] vs 42% [141/337] of all malformed infants in the first and second periods, respectively). The overall accurate prenatal diagnosis rate improved over time from 47% (128/274) to 58% (329/569) because of significant improvements in accurate prenatal diagnosis of CHD subtypes (23% [16/70] vs 65% [151/232] in the first and second periods, respectively, P < 0.0001). Conclusions The frequency of malformed newborns was higher in the tertiary center than in the general population. The increased number of cases with prenatal suspicion and diagnosis of CHD contributed to the increased frequency of malformed infants during the study period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]