Search

Background: Combined first‐trimester screening (cFTS) for fetal anomalies involves maternal serum screening for biochemical markers and measurement of the nuchal translucency (NT) by ultrasound. Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) analyses cell‐free DNA present in a maternal blood sample for presence of fetal chromosomal aneuploidies. Aims: To compare NIPS with cFTS as frontline screening in a public hospital in Australia. Materials and methods: Women were offered NIPS in addition to the usual cFTS routinely offered to all women at a public hospital in NSW, Australia. The cFTS sample was collected at ten weeks' gestation and the NIPS sample at 12 weeks' gestation at the ultrasound appointment. Results: In a low‐risk population of 997 women, frontline NIPS had a screen‐positive rate of 0.5% (5/997) vs 4.2% (42/997) with cFTS. cFTS correctly identified one trisomy 21 case and one trisomy 18 case; however, there were two trisomy 18 false negatives. Of five positive NIPS calls, four were correctly identified as trisomy 21 (one) and trisomy 18 (three); there were no NIPS false negatives. Overall, the false‐positive rate with NIPS was 0.1% vs 4.0% by cFTS. Conclusions: The lower screen‐positive rate with NIPS for common trisomies was a result of the significantly lower false‐positive rate with NIPS. Consequently, NIPS as first‐line screening, even if funded by the hospital, may provide cost savings. We believe NIPS should be used from ten weeks' gestation in conjunction with morphology ultrasound for routine first‐trimester prenatal management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although nearly all noninvasive prenatal testing is currently based on analyzing circulating maternal cell-free DNA, the technical methods usedvary considerably. We review the different methods. Based on validation trials and clinical experience, there are mostly relatively small differences in screening performance for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in singleton pregnancies. Recent reports show low no-call rates for all methods, diminishing its importance when choosing a laboratory. However, method can be an important consideration for twin pregnancies, screening for sex chromosome abnormalities, microdeletion syndromes, triploidy, molar pregnancies, rare autosomal trisomies, and segmental imbalances, and detecting maternal chromosome abnormalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening has high detection for the common fetal autosomal aneuploidies, but is not diagnostic. The positive predictive value should be utilized in counseling after a positive cell-free DNA screen, and diagnostic testing should be offered for confirmation. cfDNA screening does not report a result in ~3% of cases; nonreportable results indicate an increased risk for aneuploidy and some adverse perinatal outcomes. False-positive cfDNA screening occurs due to confined placental mosaicism, maternal copy number variants, mosaicism, and cancer. Pretest education and counseling should be provided with emphasis on the potential benefits, risks, and limitations before cfDNA screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study aimed to assess the utility of ultrasound screening for pregnancies with positive noninvasive prenatal testing results for trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of positive noninvasive prenatal testing results and first‐trimester ultrasound screening at our department between 2013 and 2019. Invasive genetic testing was performed if the patient had positive noninvasive prenatal testing results. Fetal ultrasound and cytogenetic data were collected. Noninvasive prenatal testing was performed in the women for advanced maternal age, nuchal translucency thickness, or history of abnormality in the previous child or relative. Results: Forty‐one pregnant women had positive noninvasive prenatal testing results for trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13. Twenty‐three women had positive results for trisomy 21, 13 had positive results for trisomy 18, and 5 had positive results for trisomy 13 at 11 to 14 weeks of gestation. The positive predictive value of noninvasive prenatal testing was 100% for trisomy 21, 84.6% for trisomy 18, and 100% for trisomy 13. The positive predictive value of positive noninvasive prenatal testing results and fetal morphological abnormalities was 100% for trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13. Conclusion: Combining an ultrasound examination with noninvasive prenatal testing resulted in a higher positive predictive value for trisomy 18. Normal ultrasound examination results can help alleviate stress caused by false‐positive noninvasive prenatal testing results. In contrast, the positive predictive value and negative predictive value for trisomy 21 were not altered by adding an ultrasound examination to noninvasive prenatal testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic value of the BACs-on-Beads (BoBs) assay for the rapid diagnosis of common aneuploidies and microdeletions.Methods: A total of 4961 pregnant women admitted to the Wuxi Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University from January 2017 to March 2019 were enrolled. BoBs assay and conventional karyotyping were applied to detect amniotic fluid samples with various indications for prenatal diagnosis. Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) and maternal cell contamination (MCC) tests were used for further validation.Results: The overall abnormality detection rates (BoBs associated with karyotyping) were 4.25% (211/4961). The prenatal diagnosis success rate of karyotyping was 99.4% (4933/4961), compared to 100% (4961/4961) using the BoBs assays. The BoBs assay was similar to karyotyping for the detection of trisomy 21 (1.01%, 50/4961), trisomy 18 (0.40%, 20/4961), trisomy 13 (0.04%, 2/4961), and sex chromosomal aneuploidies (0.15%, 12/4961). The BoBs assay also identified sex chromosomal microduplications/microdeletions (1.73%, 86/4961), 22q11.2 microdeletions/microduplications (0.1%, 5/4961), and Cri du Chat syndrome (0.02%, 1/4961) which were missed by karyotyping. The sensitivity for the detection of numerical chromosomal abnormalities of the BoBs assay and karyotyping analysis was 100% (95/95, 95% CI: 1.0-1.0) and 98.9% (94/95, 95% CI: 0.969-1.010), respectively. The sensitivity of detecting structural chromosomal abnormalities in the BoBs assay was significantly higher than those of karyotyping (79.3%, 92/116, 95% CI: 0.718-0.868) versus 21.6% (25/116, 95% CI: 0.140-0.291) (p < .01).Conclusions: The BoBs assay is a reliable and rapid test for the detection of common aneuploidies and nine microdeletion syndromes with high sensitivity and accuracy in prenatal diagnosis. The assay can compensate for the limitations of karyotyping analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Soft markers were originally introduced to prenatal ultrasonography to improve the detection of trisomy 21 over that achievable with age-based and serum screening strategies. As prenatal genetic screening strategies have greatly evolved in the last 2 decades, the relative importance of soft markers has shifted. The purpose of this document is to discuss the recommended evaluation and management of isolated soft markers in the context of current maternal serum screening and cell-free DNA screening options. In this document, "isolated" is used to describe a soft marker that has been identified in the absence of any fetal structural anomaly, growth restriction, or additional soft marker following a detailed obstetrical ultrasound examination. In this document, "serum screening methods" refers to all maternal screening strategies, including first-trimester screen, integrated screen, sequential screen, contingent screen, or quad screen. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommends the following approach to the evaluation and management of isolated soft markers: (1) we do not recommend diagnostic testing for aneuploidy solely for the evaluation of an isolated soft marker following a negative serum or cell-free DNA screening result (GRADE 1B); (2) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated echogenic intracardiac focus, echogenic bowel, urinary tract dilation, or shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening with cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive (GRADE 1B); (3) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated thickened nuchal fold or isolated absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening through cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive or diagnostic testing via amniocentesis, depending on clinical circumstances and patient preference (GRADE 1B); (4) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated choroid plexus cysts, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 18 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening with cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive (GRADE 1C); (5) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and an isolated echogenic intracardiac focus, we recommend no further evaluation as this finding is a normal variant of no clinical importance with no indication for fetal echocardiography, follow-up ultrasound imaging, or postnatal evaluation (GRADE 1B); (6) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and isolated fetal echogenic bowel, urinary tract dilation, or shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation (GRADE 1B); (7) for pregnant people with negative serum screening results and isolated thickened nuchal fold or absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and discussion of options for no further aneuploidy evaluation, noninvasive aneuploidy screening through cell-free DNA, or diagnostic testing via amniocentesis, depending on clinical circumstances and patient preference (GRADE 1B); (8) for pregnant people with negative cell-free DNA screening results and isolated thickened nuchal fold or absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation (GRADE 1B); (9) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and isolated choroid plexus cysts, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation, as this finding is a normal variant of no clinical importance with no indication for follow-up ultrasound imaging or postnatal evaluation (GRADE 1C); (10) for fetuses with isolated echogenic bowel, we recommend an evaluation for cystic fibrosis and fetal cytomegalovirus infection and a third-trimester ultrasound examination for reassessment and evaluation of growth (GRADE 1C); (11) for fetuses with an isolated single umbilical artery, we recommend no additional evaluation for aneuploidy, regardless of whether results of previous aneuploidy screening were low risk or testing was declined. We recommend a third-trimester ultrasound examination to evaluate growth and consideration of weekly antenatal fetal surveillance beginning at 36 0/7 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1C); (12) for fetuses with isolated urinary tract dilation A1, we recommend an ultrasound examination at ≥32 weeks of gestation to determine if postnatal pediatric urology or nephrology follow-up is needed. For fetuses with urinary tract dilation A2-3, we recommend an individualized follow-up ultrasound assessment with planned postnatal follow-up (GRADE 1C); (13) for fetuses with isolated shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend a third-trimester ultrasound examination for reassessment and evaluation of growth (GRADE 1C). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy and diagnostic value of genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for the detection of fetal aneuploidies in multiple gestations, with a focus on dichorionic-diamniotic twin pregnancies.Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study including data from pregnant women with a twin or higher-order gestation who underwent genome-wide NIPT at one of the eight Belgian genetic centers between November 1, 2013, and March 1, 2020. Chorionicity and amnionicity were determined by ultrasonography. Follow-up invasive testing was carried out in the event of positive NIPT results. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for the detection of trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in the dichorionic-diamniotic twin cohort.Results: Unique NIPT analyses were performed for 4,150 pregnant women with a multiple gestation and an additional 767 with vanishing gestations. The failure rate in multiple gestations excluding vanishing gestations ranged from 0% to 11.7% among the different genetic centers. Overall, the failure rate was 4.8%, which could be reduced to 1.2% after single resampling. There were no common fetal trisomies detected among the 86 monochorionic-monoamniotic and 25 triplet cases. Two monochorionic-diamniotic twins had an NIPT result indicative of a trisomy 21, which was confirmed in both fetuses. Among 2,716 dichorionic-diamniotic twin gestations, a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 74.12-100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 99.86-100%) was reached for trisomy 21 (n=12). For trisomy 18 (n=3), the respective values were 75% (95% CI 30.06-95.44%) sensitivity and 100% (95% CI 99.86-100%) specificity, and for trisomy 13 (n=2), 100% (95% CI 20.65-100%) sensitivity and 99.96% (95% CI 99.79-99.99%) specificity. In the vanishing gestation group, 28 NIPT results were positive for trisomy 21, 18, or 13, with only five confirmed trisomies.Conclusion: Genome-wide NIPT performed accurately for detection of aneuploidy in dichorionic-diamniotic twin gestations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate the epidemiology of chromosomal abnormalities (CA) in fetuses of all pregnancies based on a provincial‐wide birth defects‐monitoring system, which could provide scientific basis for making relatively policy and research. Methods: Chromosomal abnormalities cases were collected from all hospitals in Hunan Province, China, between 2016 and 2019. The prevalence of CAs was calculated to examine associations among infant sex, maternal age and region. The rates of prenatal diagnosis and termination of pregnancy (TOP) involving CA or associated anomalies were calculated as rates or proportions. Results: From 2016 to 2019, a total of 2 883 890 perinatal infants (28 weeks of gestation to postpartum 7 days) underwent prenatal screening and diagnostic tests, and 3181 fetuses were diagnosed as CA, with the prevalence of 11.03/10 000. The average prevalence of CAs was higher for male than female fetuses (11.33/10 000 vs 10.06/10 000) (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.05–1.21), which was higher in urban areas than rural areas (23.03/10 000 vs 7.13/10 000) (OR = 3.23, 95% CI: 3.02–3.47), and the prevalence increased linearly with maternal age (Xtrend2 = 1821.844, P = 0.000). Among the fetuses with CAs, 3097 (97.36%) were diagnosed prenatally, and 3046 (98.35%) underwent TOP. The majority of CA were numerical abnormalities (90.18%). The main types of numerical autosomal abnormalities were trisomy 21 (6.69/10 000, 59.57%), trisomy 18 (1.13/10 000, 10.04%) and trisomy 13 (0.21/10 000, 1.88%). The main types of numerical gonosomal abnormalities were Klinefelter syndrome (0.68/10 000, 6.02%), Turner syndrome (0.49/10 000, 4.39%), Triple X syndrome (0.26/10 000, 2.29%) and 47,XYY syndrome (0.21/10 000, 1.91%). The three associated anomalies with the highest proportions were congenital heart defects (CHD) (41.06%), cleft palate or/and cleft lip (10.89%) and congenital talipes equinovarus (8.94%). Conclusion: The prevalence of CA was lower than that reported. Chromosome detection should be further promoted including test contest and coverage, especially for urban areas, older mothers and fetuses with CHD, cleft palate or/and cleft lip or congenital talipes equinovarus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Maternal characteristics and neonatal outcomes associated with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) results were analysed retrospectively to assess the details of false-positive and false-negative results after initial blood sampling in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).Study Design: A multicentre retrospective study was performed for women undergoing NIPT who received discordant cfDNA results between April 2013 and March 2018. The NIPT data obtained using massive parallel sequencing were studied in terms of maternal background, fetal fraction, z-scores, invasive procedure results and neonatal outcomes after birth.Results: Of the 56,545 women who participated in this study, 54 false-positive (0.095 %) and three false-negative (0.006 %) cases were found. Seven of the 54 false-positive cases (13.0 %) had vanishing twin on ultrasonography. Among the 18 false-positive cases of trisomy 18, confined placental mosaicism (CPM) was confirmed in three cases (16.7 %), while CPM was present in one of the three false-negative cases of trisomy 21.Conclusion: These data suggest that the incidence of women with false-positive or false-negative results is relatively low, that such false results can often be explained, and that vanishing twin and CPM are potential causes of NIPT failure. Genetic counselling with regard to false results is important for clients prior to undergoing NIPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ductus venosus agenesis (DVA) is a rare condition with a variable prognosis that relies partly on the presence of associated conditions. The purpose of our study was to analyze the literature regarding the post-natal outcome of fetuses with DVA associated with fetal malformations, in order to discuss the best management options for couples. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature of MEDLINE and SCOPUS electronic databases in a 25-year period from 1992 to September 2017. Methods: We found 340 cases of DVA associated with fetal abnormalities. The most common chromosomal abnormalities were: monosomy X (12/48, 25%), trisomy 21 (11/48, 22.9%) and trisomy 18 (6/48, 12.5%). From the 340 cases with DVA, in 31 cases the umbilical venous shunt type was not reported. Of the fetuses, 60.8% (188/309) had an extrahepatic umbilical venous drainage while 39.2% (121/309) presented an intrahepatic connection. The DVA was associated in 71 cases (23.0%) with cardiac abnormalities, in 82 cases (26.5%) with extracardiac abnormalities and in 85 cases (27.5%) with both cardiac and extracardiac abnormalities. Conclusion: DVA associated with both cardiac and extracardiac malformations may confer a poorer fetal outcome, a clinically relevant fact that should clarify what can be expected from this entity and help prenatal counseling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To report the experience on the clinical use of noninvasive cell-free (cf) DNA testing at late pregnancy.Study Design: A cohort of 1539 women with singleton gestations of ≥23 weeks receiving cfDNA testing in a 3-year period were included for this study. Maternal characteristics and data on cfDNA testing, confirming diagnostic testing and pregnancy outcome were reviewed.Results: During the study period, 1539 patients had cfDNA testing although they had a normal first-trimester screening. Of these, 7 cases had a positive result, including 5 for chromosome 21, one for chromosome 18, and one for chromosome 13. The most common indication was soft markers on ultrasound, followed by polyhydramnios. Cytogenetic testing was done for the 5 trisomy 21 positive cases, and confirmed the cfDNA results. Confirmative testing was declined in the two cases with positive cfDNA for trisomy 18/13, and postnatal placental investigation showed confined placental mosaicism with normal karyotype in the cord blood of newborns. There were no confirmed false negatives reported. The cfDNA screening achieved a positive predictive value of 71.4 % and a negative predictive value of 100 % in late pregnancy for common trisomies.Conclusions: There is no gestational age upper limit for cfDNA use in the clinical practice. Most of the time, cfDNA was used in late gestation for reassurance in patients who is at low risk for aneuploidies but had second-trimester soft markers on ultrasound. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cell‐free DNA screening has quickly become established in Australia as an accurate – albeit costly – prenatal screening test for trisomy 21, 18 and 13. It is also commonly used for the detection of sex chromosome abnormalities. The increasing number of prenatal screening pathways available to women has increased the complexity of pretest counselling. Concurrent advances in diagnostic testing with the widespread use of chromosomal microarrays create further challenges for the continuing education of clinicians and health consumers. This article aims to answer common clinical questions in this rapidly evolving field and complements the recently updated Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Statement on Prenatal Screening for Fetal Chromosome and Genetic Conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of a previously developed model for the first-trimester combined test in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13.Methods: This was a prospective validation study of screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by assessment of a combination of maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency, fetal heart rate and serum free β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation in 108 982 singleton pregnancies undergoing routine care in three maternity hospitals. A previously published algorithm was used to calculate patient-specific risks for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 in each patient. The detection rate (DR) and false-positive rate (FPR) at estimated risk cut-offs from 1 in 2 to 1 in 1000 were determined. The proportions of trisomies detected were compared to their expected values in different risk groups.Results: In the study population, there were 108 112 (99.2%) cases with normal fetal karyotype or birth of a phenotypically normal neonate and 870 (0.8%) cases with abnormal karyotype, including trisomy 21 (n = 432), trisomy 18 (n = 166), trisomy 13 (n = 56), monosomy X (n = 63), triploidy (n = 35) or other aneuploidy (n = 118). The screen-positive rates, standardized according to the maternal age distribution in England and Wales in 2011, of fetuses with abnormal or normal karyotype were compatible with those predicted from the previous model; at a risk cut-off of 1 in 100, the FPR was about 4% and the DRs for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 were 90%, 97% and 92%, respectively. There was evidence that the algorithm overestimated risk. This could, to some degree, reflect under-ascertainment in pregnancies ending in miscarriage or stillbirth.Conclusion: In a prospective validation study, the first-trimester combined test detected 90%, 97% and 92% of trisomies 21, 18 and 13, respectively, as well as > 95% of cases of monosomy X and triploidies and > 50% of other chromosomal abnormalities, at a FPR of 4%. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: First, to report the distribution of the fetal fraction of cell-free (cf) DNA and the rate of a failed cfDNA test result in trisomies 21, 18 and 13, by comparison with pregnancies unaffected by these trisomies, second, to examine the possible effects of maternal and fetal characteristics on the fetal fraction, and third, to consider the options for further management of pregnancies with a failed result.Methods: This was a cohort study of 10 698 singleton pregnancies undergoing screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by cfDNA testing at 10-14 weeks' gestation. There were 160 cases of trisomy 21, 50 of trisomy 18, 16 of trisomy 13 and 10 472 were unaffected by these trisomies. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine significant predictors of fetal fraction and a failed cfDNA test result amongst maternal and fetal characteristics.Results: Fetal fraction decreased with increasing body mass index and maternal age, was lower in women of South Asian racial origin than in Caucasians and in assisted compared to natural conceptions. It increased with fetal crown-rump length and higher levels of serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A and free β-human chorionic gonadotropin. The median fetal fraction was 11.0% (interquartile range (IQR), 8.3-14.4%) in the unaffected group, 10.7% (IQR, 7.8-14.3%) in trisomy 21, 8.6% (IQR, 5.0-10.2%) in trisomy 18 and 7.0% (IQR, 6.0-9.4%) in trisomy 13. There was a failed result from cfDNA testing after first sampling in 2.9% of the unaffected group, 1.9% of trisomy 21, 8.0% of trisomy 18 and 6.3% of trisomy 13. In the cases with a failed result, 7% of women had invasive testing, mainly because of high risk from the combined test and/or presence of sonographic features suggestive of trisomies 18 and 13. All cases of trisomies were detected prenatally.Conclusions: In cases of a failed cfDNA test, the rate of trisomies 18 and 13, but not trisomy 21, is higher than in those with a successful test. In the management of such cases, the decision in favor of invasive testing should depend on the risk of prior screening and the results of detailed ultrasound examination. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the potential performance of screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis of maternal blood using the IONA® test.Methods: This was a nested case-control study of cfDNA analysis of maternal plasma using the IONA test. Samples were obtained at 11-13 weeks' gestation, before chorionic villus sampling, from 201 euploid pregnancies, 35 with trisomy 21, four with trisomy 18 and two with trisomy 13. Laboratory personnel were blinded to the fetal karyotype.Results: Probability scores for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 were given for 241/242 samples analyzed. No probability score was provided for one (0.5%) euploid pregnancy because of low fetal fraction. In all 35 cases of trisomy 21 the probability score for trisomy 21 was > 95% and the scores for trisomies 18 and 13 were ≤ 0.0001%. In all four cases of trisomy 18, the probability score for trisomy 18 was > 77% and the scores for trisomies 21 and 13 were ≤ 0.0001%. In the two cases of trisomy 13, the probability score for trisomy 13 was > 59% and the scores for trisomies 21 and 18 were ≤ 0.0001%. In the 200 euploid pregnancies with a test result, the probability score was < 0.08% for trisomy 21, < 0.001% for trisomy 18 and < 0.002% for trisomy 13. Therefore, the IONA test detected 100% of all three trisomies, with a false-positive rate of 0%.Conclusion: The IONA test successfully differentiated all cases of trisomies 21, 18 and 13 from euploid pregnancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cell-free DNA noninvasive prenatal screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 has been rapidly adopted into clinical practice. However, previous studies are limited by a lack of follow-up genetic testing to confirm the outcomes and accurately assess test performance, particularly in women at a low risk for aneuploidy.Objective: To measure and compare the performance of cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 between women at a low and high risk for aneuploidy in a large, prospective cohort with genetic confirmation of results STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter prospective observational study at 21 centers in 6 countries. Women who had single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 were enrolled. Genetic confirmation was obtained from prenatal or newborn DNA samples. The test performance and test failure (no-call) rates were assessed for the cohort, and women with low and high previous risks for aneuploidy were compared. An updated cell-free DNA algorithm blinded to the pregnancy outcome was also assessed.Results: A total of 20,194 women were enrolled at a median gestational age of 12.6 weeks (interquartile range, 11.6-13.9). The genetic outcomes were confirmed in 17,851 cases (88.4%): 13,043 (73.1%) low-risk and 4808 (26.9%) high-risk cases for aneuploidy. Overall, 133 trisomies were diagnosed (100 trisomy 21; 18 trisomy 18; 15 trisomy 13). The cell-free DNA screen positive rate was lower in the low-risk vs the high-risk group (0.27% vs 2.2%; P<.0001). The sensitivity and specificity were similar between the groups. The positive predictive value for the low- and high-risk groups was 85.7% vs 97.5%; P=.058 for trisomy 21; 50.0% vs 81.3%; P=.283 for trisomy 18; and 62.5% vs 83.3; P=.58 for trisomy 13, respectively. Overall, 602 (3.4%) patients had no-call result after the first draw and 287 (1.61%) after including cases with a second draw. The trisomy rate was higher in the 287 cases with no-call results than patients with a result on a first draw (2.8% vs 0.7%; P=.001). The updated algorithm showed similar sensitivity and specificity to the study algorithm with a lower no-call rate.Conclusion: In women at a low risk for aneuploidy, single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA has high sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value of 85.7% for trisomy 21 and 74.3% for the 3 common trisomies. Patients who receive a no-call result are at an increased risk of aneuploidy and require additional investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Our objective was to evaluate changes in the timing of prenatal diagnosis and abortion for chromosomal abnormalities over the past 10 years.Study Design: This retrospective review identified singleton pregnancies with fetal chromosomal abnormalities that were diagnosed from 2005-2014 and included Down syndrome, Trisomy 18, and Trisomy 13. The study period was divided into 3 intervals: 2005-2006; 2007-2011; and 2012-2014. Gestational ages at prenatal diagnosis and abortion were compared over these intervals.Results: The 213 cases included 142 cases of Down syndrome (66.7%), 47 cases of Trisomy 18 (22.1%), and 24 cases of Trisomy 13 (11.3%). Two hundred one women (94.4%) chose to undergo abortion. The median gestational ages at prenatal diagnosis and abortion for Trisomy 18 or 13 were 12 weeks (interquartile range, 12-13 weeks) and 13 weeks (interquartile range, 12-15.5 weeks) and did not change over the study period. In contrast, in pregnancies with Down syndrome, the median gestational age at prenatal diagnosis (16, 13, and 12 weeks; P < .001) and abortion (17, 14, and 13 weeks; P < .001) both decreased significantly over the study intervals. In Down syndrome pregnancies, the proportion of women who underwent chorionic villus sampling significantly increased over the 3 study intervals (36%, 63%, and 86%; P < .001).Conclusion: Since 2005, the gestational ages at prenatal diagnosis and abortion for Down syndrome have declined significantly. These changes are likely attributable to improvements in early screening that leads to higher rates of chorionic villus sampling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]