Search

Non-invasive prenatal testing was first discovered in 1988; it was primarily thought to be able to detect common aneuploidies, such as Patau syndrome (T13), Edward Syndrome (T18), and Down syndrome (T21). It comprises a simple technique involving the analysis of cell-free foetal DNA (cffDNA) obtained through maternal serum, using advances in next-generation sequencing. NIPT has shown promise as a simple and low-risk screening test, leading various governments and private organizations worldwide to dedicate significant resources towards its integration into national healthcare initiatives as well as the formation of consortia and research studies aimed at standardizing its implementation. This article aims to review the reliability of NIPT while discussing the current challenges prevalent among different communities worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) is the most common autosomal aneuploidy among newborns. About 90% result from meiotic nondisjunction during oogenesis, which occurs around conception, when also the most profound epigenetic modifications take place. Thus, maternal meiosis is an error prone process with an extreme sensitivity to endogenous factors, as exemplified by maternal age. This contrasts with the missing acceptance of causal exogenous factors. The proof of an environmental agent is a great challenge, both with respect to ascertainment bias, determination of time and dosage of exposure, as well as registration of the relevant individual health data affecting the birth prevalence. Based on a few exemplary epidemiological studies the feasibility of trisomy 21 monitoring is illustrated. In the nearer future the methodical premises will be clearly improved, both due to the establishment of electronic health registers and to the introduction of non-invasive prenatal tests. Down syndrome is a sentinel phenotype, presumably also with regard to other congenital anomalies. Thus, monitoring of trisomy 21 offers new chances for risk avoidance and preventive measures, but also for basic research concerning identification of relevant genomic variants involved in chromosomal nondisjunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fetal exposure to maternal anxiety is associated with low birth weight and maternal stress may be led to constriction of uterine arteries. This study compared the relation of anxiety and uterine artery doppler flow indices in pregnant women with the high and low-risk of Down syndrome. Materials and Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted among pregnant women in the second trimester that were classified as having a high or low risk according to their prenatal aneuploidy screening outcome. The high risk group underwent amniocentesis. Anxiety was initially assessed using the Spielberger State-Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and uterine artery blood flow indices were evaluated 2 times for the both groups. For the high-risk group first: immediately before amniocentesis and second: after two weeks follow up, when receiving the karyotype results and for the low-risk group in the first admission and two weeks later. Results: Totally, 375 pregnant women participated in our study that sorted into 2 risk populations based on the aneuploidy screening test, low-risk=176 and high-risk women=199. The high-risk group for Down syndrome amniocentesis showed abnormal results in the 23 cases (23/199). The mean state (P=0.003) and trait (P=0.033) of the Anxiety Inventory scores were significantly different between the groups. Baseline uterine artery indices were no significant difference between the groups. Baseline Uterine artery indices in the high-risk group was significantly different with follow-up (in both positive-amniocentesis and negative amniocentesis sub-groups) indices. Also, there was a weak and significant correlation in the uterine resistance index and STAI scores (P=0.008, r=0.137) during the follow-up period. Conclusion: All pregnant women experienced high level anxiety, especially in the high-risk group that may reduce after confirmation of prenatal aneuploidy screening test and also affects the Doppler indices. For all pregnant women; Stress management and emotional support training is recommended before and during pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a screening method for trisomy 21 and other chromosomal abnormalities has been adopted widely across the globe. However, while many clinical validation studies have been performed, less is known regarding the patient experience with NIPT. This study explored how individuals experience NIPT in a pre- and post-test setting, where NIPT is broadly available as a primary screening method with the option of reporting beyond common trisomies.Methods: Participants were recruited using social media with a strategy designed to select individuals who had the option to have NIPT as part of the TRIDENT-2 study (In the Netherlands, NIPT is only available within the TRIDENT studies executed by the NIPT consortium. This research was done independently from the NIPT consortium.) in the Netherlands. The study used online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Both were developed around a patient experience framework consisting of seven themes: information, patient as active participant, responsiveness of services, lived experience, continuity of care and relationships, communication, and support.Results: Overall, 4539 questionnaire responses were analyzed and 60% of the respondents had experienced NIPT. Of those, 1.7% received a high-risk result for trisomy or another chromosomal copy number variant (referred to as an "additional finding"). Overall, participants felt they had received sufficient information and had control over their decision regarding whether or not to choose NIPT. The vast majority of respondents who had NIPT were positive about their experience and would use it again. Those with results showing an increased probability for trisomy or additional findings were more likely to report negative feelings such as tension and anxiety, and less likely to feel that they had been sufficiently prepared for the implications of their results.Conclusions: The patient experience with first-tier NIPT in the Netherlands was largely positive. Areas for improvement included counseling on the implications of screening and the different possible outcomes of NIPT, including additional findings that may be uncovered by expanding NIPT beyond the common trisomies. The experiences reported in this study may be useful for other countries intending to implement NIPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]