Literature DB >> 23396607

Noninvasive detection of fetal trisomy 21: systematic review and report of quality and outcomes of diagnostic accuracy studies performed between 1997 and 2012.

E Mersy1, L J M Smits, L A A P van Winden, C E M de Die-Smulders, A D C Paulussen, M V E Macville, A B C Coumans, S G M Frints.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research on noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) of fetal trisomy 21 is developing fast. Commercial tests have become available. To provide an up-to-date overview of NIPT of trisomy 21, an evaluation of the methodological quality and outcomes of diagnostic accuracy studies was made.
METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the literature published between 1997 and 2012 after searching PubMed, using MeSH terms 'RNA', 'DNA' and 'Down Syndrome' in combination with 'cell-free fetal (cff) RNA', 'cffDNA', 'trisomy 21' and 'noninvasive prenatal diagnosis' and searching reference lists of reported literature. From 79 abstracts, 16 studies were included as they evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a molecular technique for NIPT of trisomy 21, and the test sensitivity and specificity were reported. Meta-analysis could not be performed due to the use of six different molecular techniques and different cutoff points. Diagnostic parameters were derived or calculated, and possible bias and applicability were evaluated utilizing the revised tool for Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS-2).
RESULTS: Seven of the included studies were recently published in large cohort studies that examined massively parallel sequencing (MPS), with or without pre-selection of chromosomes, and reported sensitivities between 98.58% [95% confidence interval (CI) 95.9-99.5%] and 100% (95% CI 96-100%) and specificities between 97.95% (95% CI 94.1-99.3%) and 100% (95% CI 99.1-100%). None of these seven large studies had an overall low risk of bias and low concerns regarding applicability. MPS with or without pre-selection of chromosomes exhibits an excellent negative predictive value (100%) in conditions with disease odds from 1:1500 to 1:200. However, positive predictive values were lower, even in high-risk pregnancies (19.7-100%). The other nine cohort studies were too small to give precise estimates (number of trisomy 21 cases: ≤25) and were not included in the discussion.
CONCLUSIONS: NIPT of trisomy 21 by MPS with or without pre-selection of chromosomes is promising and likely to replace the prenatal serum screening test that is currently combined with nuchal translucency measurement in the first trimester of pregnancy. Before NIPT can be introduced as a screening test in a social insurance health-care system, more evidence is needed from large prospective diagnostic accuracy studies in first trimester pregnancies. Moreover, we believe further assessment, of whether NIPT can be provided in a cost-effective, timely and equitable manner for every pregnant woman, is required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  QUADAS-2; cell-free fetal DNA/RNA; noninvasive prenatal testing; trisomy 21

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23396607     DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmt001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod Update        ISSN: 1355-4786            Impact factor:   15.610


  21 in total

Review 1.  Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women.

Authors:  Mylène Badeau; Carmen Lindsay; Jonatan Blais; Leon Nshimyumukiza; Yemisi Takwoingi; Sylvie Langlois; France Légaré; Yves Giguère; Alexis F Turgeon; William Witteman; François Rousseau
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-11-10

2.  A prospective clinical trial to compare the performance of dried blood spots prenatal screening for Down's syndrome with conventional non-invasive testing technology.

Authors:  Huiying Hu; Yulin Jiang; Minghui Zhang; Shanying Liu; Na Hao; Jing Zhou; Juntao Liu; Xiaojin Zhang; Liangkun Ma
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2017-01-05

3.  Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13, Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies, and Microdeletions: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

4.  Diagnostic cytogenetic testing following positive noninvasive prenatal screening results: a clinical laboratory practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

Authors:  Athena M Cherry; Yassmine M Akkari; Kimberly M Barr; Hutton M Kearney; Nancy C Rose; Sarah T South; James H Tepperberg; Jeanne M Meck
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Disease specific characteristics of fetal epigenetic markers for non-invasive prenatal testing of trisomy 21.

Authors:  Ji Hyae Lim; Da Eun Lee; So Yeon Park; Do Jin Kim; Hyun Kyong Ahn; You Jung Han; Moon Young Kim; Hyun Mee Ryu
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.063

6.  Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy and beyond: challenges of responsible innovation in prenatal screening.

Authors:  Wybo Dondorp; Guido de Wert; Yvonne Bombard; Diana W Bianchi; Carsten Bergmann; Pascal Borry; Lyn S Chitty; Florence Fellmann; Francesca Forzano; Alison Hall; Lidewij Henneman; Heidi C Howard; Anneke Lucassen; Kelly Ormond; Borut Peterlin; Dragica Radojkovic; Wolf Rogowski; Maria Soller; Aad Tibben; Lisbeth Tranebjærg; Carla G van El; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 7.  Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sian Taylor-Phillips; Karoline Freeman; Julia Geppert; Adeola Agbebiyi; Olalekan A Uthman; Jason Madan; Angus Clarke; Siobhan Quenby; Aileen Clarke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Microarray-Based Analysis of Methylation Status of CpGs in Placental DNA and Maternal Blood DNA--Potential New Epigenetic Biomarkers for Cell Free Fetal DNA-Based Diagnosis.

Authors:  Lotte Hatt; Mads M Aagaard; Jesper Graakjaer; Cathrine Bach; Steffen Sommer; Inge E Agerholm; Steen Kølvraa; Anders Bojesen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  A new model for providing cell-free DNA and risk assessment for chromosome abnormalities in a public hospital setting.

Authors:  Robert Wallerstein; Andrea Jelks; Matthew J Garabedian
Journal:  J Pregnancy       Date:  2014-07-02

Review 10.  Two kinds of common prenatal screening tests for Down's syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuan Yao; Yang Liao; Mei Han; Sheng-Lan Li; Juan Luo; Bo Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.