| Literature DB >> 22640877 |
Elisavet A Papageorgiou1, Philippos C Patsalis.
Abstract
Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) has substantial medical importance as it targets the development of safer and more effective methods to avoid the risk of fetal loss associated with currently used invasive methods. Several approaches have been demonstrated as being proof-of concept for NIPD of chromosomal aneuploidies. These approaches include cell-based and cell-free detection methods, involving the investigation of fetal cells in the maternal circulation, formaldehyde treatment of maternal plasma, DNA methylation studies using sodium bisulfite or restriction enzymes, protein-based studies, identification of fetal-specific mRNAs and digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR) approaches, and recently next-generation sequencing and methylated DNA immunoprecipitation real-time quantitative PCR-based approaches. Although all these NIPD methods have both advantages and limitations, some are moving closer to clinical implementation. Biotechnology companies dedicated to the development of NIPD tests such as the sequencing- or methylation-based approaches are finalizing large clinical trials. It is expected that these new technologies will facilitate safer, more sensitive and accurate prenatal diagnostic tests in the near future. In this review, we highlight the most recent advances in methods for NIPD of aneuploidies, and we discuss their future implications in clinical practice.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22640877 PMCID: PMC3506912 DOI: 10.1186/gm345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Med ISSN: 1756-994X Impact factor: 11.117
Advantages and disadvantages of different NIPD approaches
| Technology | Sensitivity/specificity (%) | Cost | Complexity | Reproduced by other groupsa | Advantages | Technical and clinical challenges |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formaldehyde treatment [ | 98.2% sensitivity | Low | Simple | No | Indirect enrichment of fetal DNA | Requires a large number of informative SNPs |
| DNA methylation studies using sodium bisulfite [ | Small independent studies | Low | Simple | Not tested | Direct enrichment of fetal DNA | DNA degradation, full conversion is rarely achieved |
| DNA methylation studies using restriction enzymes [ | Small independent studies | Low | Simple | Not tested | Indirect enrichment of fetal DNA | Limited to the investigation of regions with restriction sites |
| Protein-based studies [ | Small independent studies | Low | Simple | Not tested | Direct discrimination of fetal proteins | Requires accurate quantification to distinguish normal from abnormal pregnancies |
| Next-generation sequencing [ | 99.2 to 100% sensitivity | High | Complex | Yes | Reliable | Time consuming (more than one week to obtain the result), laborious, requires technical expertise, requires expensive equipment and infrastructure |
| MeDIP real time qPCR-based approach [ | 100% sensitivity | Low | Simple | Not tested | Results obtained within 3 to 4 days | Requires 100% antibody performance, requires extensive quality control of reagents prior to use |
| Identification of fetal-specific mRNAs [ | 100% sensitivity | Low | Simple | Not tested | Direct discrimination of fetal RNA from maternal RNA | Requires a large number of informative SNPs, limited by mRNA stability |
| Digital PCR-based approach [ | Proof-of-principle | High | Complex | Not tested | Accurate quantification of DNA molecules | Requires technical expertise, simplification is achieved by the use of microfluidic devices, which are expensive and not widely available |
| Epigenetic-genetic chromosome-dosage approach [ | 96.9% sensitivity | High | Complex | Not tested | Use of digital PCR | Requires a large number of informative SNPs, simplification is achieved by the use of microfluidic devices, which are expensive and not widely available |
a'No' refers to the presence of published literature indicating failure to reproduce the results by independent groups; 'Not tested' refers to the absence of published literature indicating reproduction of the results by independent groups. MeDIP, methylated DNA immunoprecipitation; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; qPCR, quantitative polymerase chain reaction; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism.
Comparison of clinical validation studies performed for the NIPD of aneuploidies
| NIPD clinical study | Groups tested | Exclusion criteria | Excluded cases (%) | Clinical findings: sensitivity/specificity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NGS study [ | 667 normal | Insufficient sample quality (for example, amount of sample) | 7.1 | 100/97.9 |
| NGS study [ | 441 normal | Insufficient sample quality (fetal fraction, total DNA) | 6.4 | 100/99.7 |
| NGS study [ | 4,452 normal | Sample not adequate (sample volume, long processing time, poor sample quality) | 63.6 | 99.2/98.6 |
| NGS study | 252 normal | No exclusion criteria were mentioned | 0 | 100/100 |
| NGS study | 9 normal | Insufficient sample quality (for example, fetal fraction) | 5 | 100/100 |
| MeDIP real time qPCR-based approach [ | 46 normal | No exclusion criteria were mentioned | 0 | 100/100 |
| mRNA-based approach for trisomy 21[ | 137 normal | Cases with no informative SNP | 59.49 | 100/89.7 |
| Epigenetic-genetic chromosome-dosage approach [ | 24 normal | Pregnancies with female fetuses | 0 | 95.8/100 |
| Epigenetic-genetic chromosome-dosage approach [ | 33 normal | Cases with no informative SNP | 0 | 96.9 /92.8 |
DANSR, digital analysis of selected regions; MeDIP, methylated DNA immunoprecipitation; NGS, next-generation sequencing; qPCR, quantitative polymerase chain reaction; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism.