Search

Twin pregnancy presents unique considerations for aneuploidy screening. Pre-test counseling regarding benefits, alternatives, and options for aneuploidy screening should be provided to all patients carrying twin pregnancy. This article aims to review the options for aneuploidy screening in twin pregnancy including the potential benefits and limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on study of financial analysis is carried out to assess costs and benefits of providing cell-free DNA screening in Finland, using different strategies. Topics discussed include considering the place of cell-free DNA screening it is important to make explicit the additional and marginal costs of different screening strategies and the associated benefits; and most assumptions the balance is favorable for Contingent screening.

Résumé: La procédure du dépistage du risque de trisomie 21 est complexe : une succession de tests pouvant aboutir à une amniocentèse est proposée. Le soignant doit donner une information claire et objective aux femmes enceintes, aux couples. Ce dépistage n'est pas obligatoire. Les modalités pour les groupes à risque de trisomie 21 ont été modifiées fin 2018 avec l'introduction du test ADN libre circulant de la trisomie 21 (test ADNlcT21). Un document d'information sur le dépistage combiné de la trisomie 21 avait été élaboré en 2014, en respectant certains critères de la méthodologie de la Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS). Une actualisation de ce document était nécessaire. Les modifications des seuils définissant les groupes à risque, et l'introduction du test ADNlcT21 ont été intégrées au document d'information. Il a été soumis à des groupes de travail composés de soignants et d'usagers. La lisibilité, la compréhension, l'objectivité des informations ont été discutées au sein de chaque groupe et les modifications proposées étaient validées successivement. Le document final a été repris par un graphiste pour en améliorer la présentation. Le document d'information actualisé peut servir de support au dialogue entre le soignant et la femme enceinte, entre le soignant et le couple et permettre aux futurs parents de discuter et décider de s'engager ou non dans le processus de dépistage. Ce document devra faire l'objet d'une évaluation. The procedure for screening risks of Down syndrome is complex : a series of tests that may lead to amniocentesis is offered. The caregiver must provide clear and objective information to pregnant women and/or couples. This screening is not mandatory. The modalities for groups at risk for Down syndrome changed at the end of 2018 with the introduction of the cell-free DNA test for Down syndrome (T21 cf-DNA test). A background document on combined screening for Down syndrome was developed in 2014 following some of the criteria in the methodology from the French High Health Authority (Haute Autorité de Santé – HAS). This document has been updated with changes to the thresholds identifying the groups at risk, and the introduction of the T21 cf-DNA test. Working groups composed of health users and professionals were set up. The readability, clarity and objectivity of the information were discussed within each group, after which proposed changes were validated. The final document was adapted by a graphic designer to improve its presentation. The updated document can be used as a supporting tool in the conversation between the caregiver and the pregnant woman and/or couple and allow future parents to discuss and decide whether to enter the screening process. This document will need to be assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compile current usage of serum-based prenatal screening for Down syndrome in the United States and compare it with results from a similar 2011/2012 survey. Setting: The College of American Pathologists maternal screening proficiency testing survey includes a supplemental question on the first of three yearly distributions. Methods: Information regarding tests offered and the monthly number of pregnancies tested for US-based laboratories were reviewed. Results were stratified by size of laboratory, tests offered, and pregnancies tested. Findings were compared to an earlier survey. Results: Fifty-six laboratories reported they will have screened 1,131,336 pregnancies in 2020. Of these, 36% are screened by stand-alone first trimester testing, 48% by stand-alone second trimester testing, and 16% using tests that integrate results from both trimesters. Eighty percent of all serum screens were provided by the five laboratories that performed the most screens (at least 50,000). These five performed similar proportions of first or second trimester screens (42.2% and 41.8%, respectively). Compared to eight years earlier, there are now 54% fewer laboratories. Pregnancies screened using the first trimester, second trimester, and integrated protocols were lower by 27%, 69%, and 72%, respectively. The serum screening activity in the US showed a 62% decrease from 2012 levels. During 2012–2020, the number of cell-free DNA tests increased from negligible to 1,492,332. Conclusions: Maternal serum screening for common aneuploidies has changed significantly in eight years with fewer laboratories, a shift toward larger laboratories and a 2.5-fold reduction in pregnancies tested, likely due to the introduction of cell-free DNA screening. [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: 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]

Objective: To assess trends in ultrasound-indicated prenatal diagnostic testing performed over the past two decades in the Australian state of Victoria, in the context of rapidly changing practices in aneuploidy screening and chromosome analysis.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all ultrasound-indicated prenatal diagnostic testing (amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling) performed in the state of Victoria between 1994 and 2016. Ultrasound indications for testing included: fetal structural abnormality, fetal death, fetal growth restriction, abnormal amniotic fluid volume, genetic 'soft marker' and unspecified ultrasound abnormality. Maternal age, indication for testing, type of diagnostic procedure, gestational age, type of chromosome analysis (G-banded karyotyping or chromosomal microarray (CMA)) and test results were obtained. Diagnostic yield (i.e. percentage of tests yielding a major abnormality) was analyzed by year, maternal age and gestational age. Statistical analysis was performed using the χ2 tests for trend or difference in proportions, as appropriate.Results: During the 23-year study period, 1 533 317 births were recorded and 16 152 diagnostic procedures were performed for the primary indication of ultrasound abnormality. In recent years, ultrasound abnormality became the most common indication for prenatal invasive testing (29.4% of diagnostic tests between 2013 and 2016) due to a steep decline in testing for other indications such as positive result on combined first-trimester screening or advanced maternal age alone. In 2016, over 95% of ultrasound-indicated procedures were performed with CMA; among these, pathogenic copy number variant (CNV) was the most common (3.5%) abnormality detected, followed by trisomy 21 (2.8%). The diagnostic yield of ultrasound-indicated tests performed < 16 weeks was significantly higher than that of tests performed after 20 weeks (31.5% vs 9.0%).Conclusions: Ultrasound-indicated invasive testing is contributing to prenatal diagnosis in new ways in the genomic era. A pathogenic CNV is now the most likely diagnosis after ultrasound-indicated testing, rather than trisomy 21 or other whole-chromosome aneuploidy. Despite steady improvements in first-trimester screening for aneuploidy, the diagnostic yield of ultrasound-indicated tests > 20 weeks has remained stable due to increased utilization of CMA. Procedures performed for structural abnormalities < 16 weeks continue to have the highest diagnostic yield, supporting the benefits of early fetal structural assessment at 11-13 weeks. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To report on the routine clinical implementation of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis of maternal blood for trisomies 21, 18 and 13, contingent on the results of the first-trimester combined test in twin pregnancy.Methods: Screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 was carried out in 959 twin pregnancies by assessment of a combination of maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency thickness, and serum free β-human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A at 11-13 weeks' gestation in two UK NHS hospitals. Women in the high-risk group (risk ≥ 1 in 100) were offered the option of invasive testing, cfDNA testing or no further testing, and those in the intermediate-risk group (risk 1 in 101 to 1 in 2500 in the first phase of the study and 1 in 101 to 1 in 500 in the second phase) were offered cfDNA or no further testing. The trisomic status of the pregnancies was determined by prenatal or postnatal karyotyping or examination of the neonates.Results: In 42 (4.4%) of the 959 pregnancies, there was termination, miscarriage or stillbirth with no known karyotype or there was loss to follow-up. The 917 pregnancies with known trisomic status of both twins included six that were discordant for trisomy 21, four that were discordant for trisomy 18 and 907 with no trisomy 21, 18 or 13. Following combined screening, 47 (5.1%), 203 (22.1%) and 667 (72.7%) of the pregnancies were classified as high risk, intermediate risk and low risk, respectively. The high-risk group included five (83.3%) cases of trisomy 21 and three (75.0%) of trisomy 18. The cfDNA test was carried out in 224 pregnancies and results were provided in 214 (95.5%); this group included six pregnancies with trisomy 21, three with trisomy 18 and 206 with no trisomy 21, 18 or 13. The cfDNA test classified correctly as screen positive all six cases of trisomy 21 and two of the three with trisomy 18, and as screen negative for each of the trisomies all 206 unaffected pregnancies. Contingent screening led to prenatal detection of all cases of trisomy 21 and three of four with trisomy 18.Conclusion: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of introducing cfDNA testing, contingent on the results of the first-trimester combined test for major trisomies, in a routine population of twin pregnancies. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine preferences for follow-up testing in women screened with high or intermediate risk for Down syndrome in the first or second trimester.Design: Prospective cohort study.Setting: Three public hospitals in Hong Kong, China.Sample: Women with pregnancies termed as high risk (≥1:250; HR) or intermediate risk (1:251-1200; IR) for Down syndrome.Methods: Women with pregnancies screened as HR were offered the choices of: (1) an invasive test plus chromosomal microarray (CMA) to obtain more detailed fetal genetic information; (2) non-invasive cell-free prenatal DNA screening (NIPT) to detect trisomies 13, 18 and 21, and to avoid procedure-related miscarriage; and (3) to decline any further testing. Women received standardised counselling informing them that the reporting times were identical, the procedure miscarriage risk was 0.1-0.2% and that there was no charge for screening. Women with IR pregnancies (1:251-1200) were offered NIPT as a secondary screening test.Main Outcome Measures: Uptake rate for NIPT.Results: Three hundred and forty-seven women had pregnancies deemed as HR; 344 (99.1%) women opted for follow-up testing, 216 (62.2%) of whom chose NIPT. Five hundred and seven of 614 women (82.6%) with IR risk chose NIPT. Seven (21%) of 34 women with nuchal translucency ≥3.5 mm opted for NIPT.Conclusion: In a setting where reporting times are similar and there is no cost difference between options, approximately 60% of women with pregnancies classed as HR would opt for NIPT, offering simple but limited aneuploidy assessment, over a diagnostic procedure with comprehensive and more detailed assessment.Tweetable Abstract: 60% of pregnant Chinese women prefer NIPT over CMA when screened as high risk for Down syndrome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of three different first trimester screening models for trisomies 21, 18 and 13, in terms of detection rate, invasive test rate and final costs.Material and Methods: We analyzed the distribution of risk for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in a population of 20,831 singleton pregnancies based on maternal age, fetal heart rate, nuchal translucency, free beta human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (Combined test). On the basis of our data, we estimated the performance and cost of screening for trisomies using three different models at specific cutoffs: Combined test; Cell free DNA test and Contingent screening test.Results: Using Combined test, DR for major trisomies was estimated to be 94.92%, invasive test rate was 6.3%. cfDNA would result in a DR of 97.92%, with an invasive test rate of 3.64%. Contingent screening approach would result in an overall DR of 97.82, with a rate for invasive procedure of 1.36% and a final cost lower than other screening policies (2,338,433 euro vs 5,796,060 of cfDNA and 2,385,473 of Combined test).Conclusions: Contingent screening test could be a cost-efficient and feasible first trimester screening test for aneuploidies in public health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To determine whether maternal plasma collected in cell-free DNA stabilizing tubes is suitable for measuring prenatal screening ‘serum’ markers. Methods Matched plasma and serum samples were collected from 41 second trimester and 42 first trimester non-Down’s syndrome pregnancies. Second trimester samples were tested for alpha-fetoprotein, unconjugated estriol, human chorionic gonadotropin, and inhibin-A (Beckman Coulter DxI immunoassay). First trimester samples were tested for human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A. Method comparisons performed for each marker compared plasma and serum results. Down’s syndrome likelihood ratios in serum and plasma were compared. Results Plasma and serum results for all markers were highly correlated (r > 0.983) but for all, plasma results differed, usually by proportional amounts. After conversion to multiples of the median using sample type-specific medians, the logarithmic standard deviations in serum and plasma did not differ (all p > 0.37). Likelihood ratios for the first and second trimester marker combinations were highly correlated and closely agreed (log likelihood ratios range 1.005 to 1.032; 1.000 indicates complete agreement). Conclusions These results using specialized plasma collection tubes are similar to those of our earlier study showing that plasma collected in EDTA tubes is suitable for ‘serum’ Down’s syndrome screening. Laboratories must account for proportional changes by computing new plasma medians or modifying existing serum medians. Using a portion of the plasma from cell-free DNA collection tubes for ‘serum screening’ may have an advantage in programmes that are reflexively testing cell-free DNA, as only one sample type need be collected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Prenatal screening with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) offers improved detection of Down syndrome (T21) compared to conventional screening. These tests are expensive and have fewer detectable anomalies. Our objective was to investigate potential costs and test performance of screening algorithms when accounting for detectable aneuploidies.Methods: This is a cost analysis for a large military treatment facility. Using a theoretical delivery cohort and published performance data, universal screening with cfDNA was compared to sequential screening, comparing T21 to all detectable aneuploidies. Predicted test performance and costs were calculated.Results: A cohort of 3000 deliveries was used. For T21, universal cfDNA is more expensive ($1,346,064) than sequential screening ($244,885), but has a lower false positive rate and avoids 101 invasive diagnostic tests. An additional case of T21 is detected with a marginal cost of $1,101,179. For all detectable aneuploidies, cfDNA is more expensive ($1,353,660) than sequential screening ($239,189), and 59 invasive diagnostic tests are avoided. Sequential screening detects an additional case of aneuploidy, with a cost savings of $1,114,471.Conclusions: Although cfDNA is superior in detecting T21 cases, sequential screening is superior when considering all aneuploidies detectable. The cost increase with universal cfDNA is significant, and is not justified with small improvements in the performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the performance of screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by cell-free (cf) DNA analysis of maternal blood using a new method based on paired-end massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS).Methods: This was a blinded study of plasma samples (1mL) obtained from 1000 women undergoing screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 at 11-13 weeks' gestation. The study included 50 cases with confirmed fetal trisomy 21, 30 with trisomy 18, 10 with trisomy 13 and 910 unaffected pregnancies. Paired-end MPSS with the neoBona® test allowed simultaneous assessment of fetal fraction, cfDNA fragment size distribution and chromosome counting, which were integrated into a new analysis algorithm to calculate trisomy likelihood ratios (t-score) for each chromosome of interest. Each sample was classified as trisomic or unaffected using chromosome-specific cut-offs set at t-score values of 1.5 for trisomy 21 and 3.0 for trisomies 18 and 13.Results: Valid results were provided for 988 (98.8%) cases; 12 (1.2%) samples, from nine euploid and three trisomy 21 pregnancies, did not pass quality-control criteria and were excluded from further analysis. All 47 cases of trisomy 21, all 10 of trisomy 13, 29 of 30 with trisomy 18 and all 901 unaffected cases were classified correctly. Median fetal fraction was 10.5% (range, 0.3-33.8%) and trisomic and unaffected cases with low fetal fractions of < 1% were identified correctly.Conclusions: This novel method for cfDNA analysis of maternal plasma, which utilizes paired-end MPSS, can provide accurate prediction of fetal trisomies. Use of a new multicomponent t-score removes the need to reject samples with fetal fraction < 4%, which potentially extends the benefits of non-invasive prenatal cfDNA analysis to a larger proportion of pregnancies. © 2016 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of this study was to review the performance of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for detection of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (T21, T18 and T13) in a general pregnant population as well as to update the data on high-risk pregnancies.Material and Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. Methodological quality was rated using QUADAS and scientific evidence using GRADE. Summary measures of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model.Results: In a general pregnant population, there is moderate evidence that the pooled sensitivity is 0.993 (95% CI 0.955-0.999) and specificity was 0.999 (95% CI 0.998-0.999) for the analysis of T21. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for T13 and T18 was not calculated in this population due to the low number of studies. In a high-risk pregnant population, there is moderate evidence that the pooled sensitivities for T21 and T18 are 0.998 (95% CI 0.981-0.999) and 0.977 (95% CI 0.958-0.987) respectively, and low evidence that the pooled sensitivity for T13 is 0.975 (95% CI 0.819-0.997). The pooled specificity for all three trisomies is 0.999 (95% CI 0.998-0.999).Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis using GRADE that shows that NIPT performs well as a screen for trisomy 21 in a general pregnant population. Although the false positive rate is low compared with first trimester combined screening, women should still be advised to confirm a positive result by invasive testing if termination of pregnancy is under consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: First, to assess what was the uptake of cell free DNA (cfDNA) testing after a combined test and the maternal and fetal factors that influenced this decision, and second, to assess the uptake and factors that influence the choice of invasive testing.Methods: This observational retrospective study included 1083 singleton pregnancies who had a combined test for screening for Down syndrome between 11 (+) (0) and 13 (+) (6) weeks. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine which factors affected the uptake of cfDNA test and invasive testing among risk for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, maternal characteristics and fetal nuchal translucency (NT) thickness.Results: Two-hundred fifty-seven (23.7%) women had a cfDNA test, 89 (8.2%) had an invasive test, and 737 (68.1%) had no further test. The uptake of cfDNA increased with the risk for trisomies (p < 0.001), maternal age (p = 0.013), and was higher in nulliparous women (p = 0.004). The uptake of invasive test increased with the risk for trisomies (p < 0.001) and NT thickness (p < 0.001).Conclusions: This study shows that the uptake of cfDNA testing increases with the risk for trisomies, maternal age, and is higher in nulliparous, whereas the uptake of invasive testing increases with the risk for trisomies and NT thickness. [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]

Objectives: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis of maternal blood for detection of trisomies 21, 18 and 13 is superior to other methods of screening but is expensive. One strategy to maximize performance at reduced cost is to offer cfDNA testing contingent on the results of the first-trimester combined test that is used currently. The objectives of this study were to report the feasibility of implementing such screening, to examine the factors affecting patient decisions concerning their options for screening and decisions on the management of affected pregnancies and to report the prenatal diagnosis of fetal trisomies and outcome of affected pregnancies following the introduction of contingent screening.Methods: We examined routine clinical implementation of contingent screening in 11,692 singleton pregnancies in two National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in the UK. Women with a risk ≥ 1 in 100 (high-risk group) were offered options of invasive testing, cfDNA testing or no further testing, and those with a risk between 1 in 101 and 1 in 2500 (intermediate-risk group) were offered cfDNA testing or no further testing. The trisomic status of the pregnancies was determined by prenatal or postnatal karyotyping or by examination of the neonates.Results: In the study population of 11,692 pregnancies, there were 47 cases of trisomy 21 and 28 of trisomies 18 or 13. Screening with the combined test followed by invasive testing for all patients in the high-risk group potentially could have detected 87% of trisomy 21 and 93% of trisomies 18 or 13, at a false-positive rate of 3.4%; the respective values for cfDNA testing in the high- and intermediate-risk groups were 98%, 82% and 0.25%. However, in the high-risk group, 38% of women chose invasive testing and 60% chose cfDNA testing; in the intermediate-risk group 92% opted for cfDNA testing. A prenatal diagnosis was made in 43 (91.5%) pregnancies with trisomy 21 and all pregnancies with trisomies 18 or 13. In many affected pregnancies the parents chose to avoid testing or termination and 32% of pregnancies with trisomy 21 resulted in live births.Conclusions: Screening for fetal trisomies by cfDNA analysis of maternal blood, contingent on the results of the combined test, can be implemented easily in routine clinical practice. In the high-risk group from the combined test, most but not all women chose cfDNA testing rather than invasive testing. Performance of screening for trisomy 21 was superior by the cfDNA test than by the combined test. However, prenatal detection of trisomies and pregnancy outcome depend not only on performance of screening tests but also on parental choice. [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]

Background Cell-free DNA-based non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy ( NIPT) is now established as the most accurate screening test for trisomy 21. This test became clinically available on a patient-funded basis in Australia and New Zealand in 2013. Aim To investigate the clinical implementation of NIPT use by members of the Australian Association of Obstetrical and Gynaecological Ultrasonologists ( AAOGU) during its first year of local availability. Method Email invitations with an embedded link to an anonymous online survey were sent to all 140 members of the AAOGU in December 2013. Results We received 54 responses to the survey (39% response rate). Two thirds of respondents were subspecialists in obstetric and gynaecological ultrasound or maternal fetal medicine. The majority of respondents had already used NIPT in their practice (94%). There was no significant difference in the proportion of respondents offering NIPT to high-risk women in private versus public practice (95 versus 82%, P = 0.14). However, inequity of access due to cost was the most common ethical issue encountered. The vast majority continued to offer an 11-13 week ultrasound in addition to NIPT. Almost all respondents (96%) were also willing to offer NIPT to low-risk women in December 2013 after appropriate genetic counselling. Conclusions Non-invasive prenatal testing was introduced into clinical care by obstetric sonologists with confidence and in accordance with the current recommended guidelines. These results may help inform future prenatal screening policy and cost-effectiveness analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Evaluate the clinical and economic consequences of fetal trisomy 21 (T21) screening with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in high-risk pregnant women. Methods: Using a decision-analytic model, we estimated the number of T21 cases detected, the number of invasive procedures performed, corresponding euploid fetal losses and total costs for three screening strategies: first trimester combined screening (FTS), integrated screening (INT) or NIPT, whereby NIPT was performed in high-risk patients (women 35 years or older or women with a positive conventional screening test). Modeling was based on a 4 million pregnant women cohort in the US. Results: NIPT, at a base case price of $795, was more clinically effective and less costly (dominant) over both FTS and INT. NIPT detected 4823 T21 cases based on 5330 invasive procedures. FTS detected 3364 T21 cases based on 108 364 procedures and INT detected 3760 cases based on 108 760 procedures. NIPT detected 28% and 43% more T21 cases compared to INT and FTS, respectively, while reducing invasive procedures by >95% and reducing euploid fetal losses by >99%. Total costs were $3786M with FTS, $3919M with INT and $3403M with NIPT. Conclusions: NIPT leads to improved T21 detection and reduction in euploid fetal loss at lower total healthcare expenditures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In singleton pregnancies, studies investigating cell-free DNA in maternal blood have consistently reported high detection rate and low false-positive rate for the 3 common fetal trisomies (trisomies 21, 18, and 13). The potential advantages of noninvasive prenatal testing in twin pregnancies are even greater than in singletons, in particular lower need for invasive testing and consequent fetal loss rate. However, several organizations do not recommend cell-free DNA in twin pregnancies and call for larger prospective studies.Objective: In response to this, we undertook a large prospective multicenter study to establish the screening performance of cell-free DNA for the 3 common trisomies in twin pregnancies. Moreover, we combined our data with that reported in published studies to obtain the best estimate of screening performance.Study Design: This was a prospective multicenter blinded study evaluating the screening performance of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma for the detection of fetal trisomies in twin pregnancies. The study took place in 6 fetal medicine centers in England, United Kingdom. The primary outcome was the screening performance and test failure rate of cell-free DNA using next generation sequencing (the IONA test). Maternal blood was taken at the time of (or after) a conventional screening test. Data were collected at enrolment, at any relevant invasive testing throughout pregnancy, and after delivery until the time of hospital discharge. Prospective detailed outcome ascertainment was undertaken on all newborns. The study was undertaken and reported according to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. A pooled analysis was also undertaken using our data and those in the studies identified by a literature search (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov) on June 6, 2020.Results: A total of 1003 women with twin pregnancies were recruited, and complete data with follow-up and reference data were available for 961 (95.8%); 276 were monochorionic and 685 were dichorionic. The failure rate was 0.31%. The mean fetal fraction was 12.2% (range, 3%-36%); all 9 samples with a 3% fetal fraction provided a valid result. There were no false-positive or false-negative results for trisomy 21 or trisomy 13, whereas there was 1 false-negative and 1 false-positive result for trisomy 18. The IONA test had a detection rate of 100% for trisomy 21 (n=13; 95% confidence interval, 75-100), 0% for trisomy 18 (n=1; 95% confidence interval, 0-98), and 100% for trisomy 13 (n=1; 95% confidence interval, 3-100). The corresponding false-positive rates were 0% (95% confidence interval, 0-0.39), 0.10% (95% confidence interval, 0-0.58), and 0% (95% confidence interval, 0-0.39), respectively. By combining data from our study with the 11 studies identified by literature search, the detection rate for trisomy 21 was 95% (n=74; 95% confidence interval, 90-99) and the false-positive rate was 0.09% (n=5598; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.19). The corresponding values for trisomy 18 were 82% (n=22; 95% confidence interval, 66-93) and 0.08% (n=4869; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.18), respectively. There were 5 cases of trisomy 13 and 3881 non-trisomy 13 pregnancies, resulting in a computed average detection rate of 80% and a false-positive rate of 0.13%.Conclusion: This large multicenter study confirms that cell-free DNA testing is the most accurate screening test for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancies, with screening performance similar to that in singletons and very low failure rates (0.31%). The predictive accuracy for trisomies 18 and 13 may be less. However, given the low false-positive rate, offering first-line screening with cell-free DNA to women with twin pregnancy is appropriate in our view and should be considered a primary screening test for trisomy 21 in twins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]