Search

The article presents a study that determines the improvement in antenatal screening for patients with Down's syndrome. It describes the method of the study that uses Monte Carlo simulation. It outlines the findings of the study which suggests that ductus venosus pulsatility index (DVPI), fetal nasal bone examination (NBE) and serum placental growth factor (PlGF) improves screening performance in patients with Down's syndrome.

Objectives A mixture model of crown-rump length (CRL)-dependent and CRL-independent nuchal translucency (NT) measurements has been proposed for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. We here compare the efficacy of the mixture model method with the standard method, which uses NT multiple of the median (MoM) values in a single distribution. Settings A routine antenatal screening programme for Down's syndrome comprising 104 affected and 22,284 unaffected pregnancies. Methods The ability of NT to distinguish between affected and unaffected pregnancies was compared using the mixture model method and the standard MoM method by using published distribution parameters for the mixture model of NT and parameters derived from these for the standard MoM method. The accuracy of the two methods was compared for NT and maternal age by comparing the median estimated risk with the prevalence of Down's syndrome in different categories of estimated risk. Results Using NT alone observed estimates of discrimination using the two methods are similar; at a 70% detection rate the false-positive rates were 12% using the mixture model method and 10% using the MoM method. Risk estimation was marginally (but not statistically significantly) more accurate using the standard MoM method. Conclusions The mixture model method offers no advantage over the standard MoM method in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome, is more complicated and less generalizable to other data-sets. The standard MoM method remains the method of choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine whether the standard deviation of nuchal translucency (NT) measurements has decreased over time and if so to revise the estimate and assess the effect of revising the estimate of the standard deviation on the performance of antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. Setting Data from a routine antenatal screening programme for Down's syndrome comprising 106 affected and 22,640 unaffected pregnancies. Methods NT measurements were converted into multiple of the median (MoM) values and standard deviations of log10 MoM values were calculated in affected and unaffected pregnancies. The screening performance of the Combined and Integrated tests (that include NT measurement) were compared using previous and revised estimates of the standard deviation. Results The standard deviation of NT in unaffected pregnancies has reduced over time (from 1998 to 2008) (e.g. from 0.1329 to 0.1105 [log10 MoM] at 12-13 completed weeks of pregnancy, reducing the variance by about 30%). This was not observed in affected pregnancies. Compared with results from the serum, urine and ultrasound screening study (SURUSS), use of the revised NT standard deviations in unaffected pregnancies resulted in an approximate 20% decrease in the false-positive rate for a given detection rate; for example, from 2.1% to 1.7% (a 19% reduction) at a 90% detection rate using the Integrated test with first trimester markers measured at 11 completed weeks' gestation and from 4.4% to 3.5% (a 20% reduction) at an 85% detection rate using the Combined test at 11 completed weeks. Conclusions The standard deviation of NT has declined over time and using the revised estimates improves the screening performance of tests that incorporate an NT measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To validate empirically the accuracy of antenatal Down's syndrome screening using the Integrated test, to compare this with other screening tests (including the Integrated test with the addition of cross trimester [CT] marker ratios) and to suggest how such validation analyses should be presented and interpreted. Methods: Using data from 7809 unaffected and 27 Down's syndrome pregnancies that had had an Integrated test, risk estimates for various screening tests (maternal age, Double, Triple, Quadruple, Combined, Integrated and serum Integrated tests) that use Integrated test markers were categorized according to quintile categories of risk estimates of the 27 affected pregnancies. For each screening test, the median risk estimate for each category was plotted against the observed prevalence within each category. Such validation plots were also produced for the Integrated test with CT marker ratios by measuring the level of the serum markers in the trimester of pregnancy not already measured in stored samples of all affected and a one-in-five sample of unaffected pregnancies. The robustness of the method was assessed by repeating the analysis for the Integrated test after re-classifying affected pregnancies with low risk estimates as unaffected, simulating the underascertainment of cases. Results: The validation plots (i) confirmed the accuracy of risk estimation for the different tests (by how close the points lay to the line of identity between predicted risk and observed prevalence), (ii) demonstrated the differences in screening performance of the different tests (by the range of risk spanned by the points and, in particular, the separation between the points representing the lowest risk and the next point), and (iii) are robust to underascertainment of affected pregnancies (by having little influence on the closeness of the points to the line of identity). Conclusion: The validation plot is a useful, simple and robust way to assess the validity of new screening methods, to assess the accuracy of risk estimation and to audit the performance of screening programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Upper and lower truncation limits are commonly applied to quantitative markers used in medical screening tests. We here examine data on 375 trisomy 18 and 522,081 unaffected singleton pregnancies, to determine if the lower truncation limit should be set below the previously specified 0.2 multiples of the median. A lower truncation limit of 0.15 would reduce the underestimation of the risk of having a trisomy 18 pregnancy in about 50% of affected pregnancies and would lead to an estimated 10 percentage point increase in the detection rate, with only a very small increase in the false-positive rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]