Literature DB >> 23529082

Is it time to sound an alarm about false-positive cell-free DNA testing for fetal aneuploidy?

Michael T Mennuti1, Athena M Cherry, Jennifer J D Morrissette, Lorraine Dugoff.   

Abstract

Testing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal blood samples has been shown to have very high sensitivity for the detection of fetal aneuploidy with very low false-positive results in high-risk patients who undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis. Recent observation in clinical practice of several cases of positive cfDNA tests for trisomy 18 and trisomy 13, which were not confirmed by cytogenetic testing of the pregnancy, may reflect a limitation of the positive predictive value of this quantitative testing, particularly when it is used to detect rare aneuploidies. Analysis of a larger number of false-positive cases is needed to evaluate whether these observations reflect the positive predictive value that should be expected. Infrequently, mechanisms (such as low percentage mosaicism or confined placental mosaicism) might also lead to positive cfDNA testing that is not concordant with standard prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis. The need to explore these and other possible causes of false-positive cfDNA testing is exemplified by 2 of these cases. Additional evaluation of cfDNA testing in clinical practice and a mechanism for the systematic reporting of false-positive and false-negative cases will be important before this test is offered widely to the general population of low-risk obstetric patients. In the meantime, incorporating information about the positive predictive value in pretest counseling and in clinical laboratory reports is recommended. These experiences reinforce the importance of offering invasive testing to confirm cfDNA results before parental decision-making.
Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cfDNA; chromosome; fetus; positive predictive value; testing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23529082     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.03.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  24 in total

1.  Current Controversies in Prenatal Diagnosis 2: NIPT results suggesting maternal cancer should always be disclosed.

Authors:  Peter Benn; Sharon E Plon; Diana W Bianchi
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Genetic counselors' experience with cell-free fetal DNA testing as a prenatal screening option for aneuploidy.

Authors:  Julie M H Horsting; Stephen R Dlouhy; Katelyn Hanson; Kimberly Quaid; Shaochun Bai; Karrie A Hines
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Noninvasive prenatal testing using a novel analysis pipeline to screen for all autosomal fetal aneuploidies improves pregnancy management.

Authors:  Baran Bayindir; Luc Dehaspe; Nathalie Brison; Paul Brady; Simon Ardui; Molka Kammoun; Lars Van der Veken; Klaske Lichtenbelt; Kris Van den Bogaert; Jeroen Van Houdt; Hilde Peeters; Hilde Van Esch; Thomy de Ravel; Eric Legius; Koen Devriendt; Joris R Vermeesch
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Placental mosaicism for Trisomy 13: a challenge in providing the cell-free fetal DNA testing.

Authors:  Xiang-Yin Liu; Hong-Guo Zhang; Rui-Xue Wang; Shuang Chen; Xiao-Wei Yu; Rui-Zhi Liu
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  A survey on awareness of genetic counseling for non-invasive prenatal testing: the first year experience in Japan.

Authors:  Junko Yotsumoto; Akihiko Sekizawa; Nobuhiro Suzumori; Takahiro Yamada; Osamu Samura; Miyuki Nishiyama; Kiyonori Miura; Hideaki Sawai; Jun Murotsuki; Michihiro Kitagawa; Yoshimasa Kamei; Hideaki Masuzaki; Fumiki Hirahara; Toshiaki Endo; Akimune Fukushima; Akira Namba; Hisao Osada; Yasuyo Kasai; Atsushi Watanabe; Yukiko Katagiri; Naoki Takeshita; Masaki Ogawa; Takashi Okai; Shunichiro Izumi; Haruka Hamanoue; Mayuko Inuzuka; Kazufumi Haino; Naoki Hamajima; Haruki Nishizawa; Yoko Okamoto; Hiroaki Nakamura; Takeshi Kanegawa; Jun Yoshimatsu; Shinya Tairaku; Katsuhiko Naruse; Hisashi Masuyama; Maki Hyodo; Takashi Kaji; Kazuhisa Maeda; Keiichi Matsubara; Masanobu Ogawa; Toshiyuki Yoshizato; Takashi Ohba; Yukie Kawano; Haruhiko Sago
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 3.172

Review 6.  Pre- and post-test genetic counseling for chromosomal and Mendelian disorders.

Authors:  Jill Fonda Allen; Katie Stoll; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 3.300

Review 7.  Review: cell-free fetal DNA in the maternal circulation as an indication of placental health and disease.

Authors:  E S Taglauer; L Wilkins-Haug; D W Bianchi
Journal:  Placenta       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 3.481

8.  The Integration of Noninvasive Prenatal Screening into the Existing Prenatal Paradigm: a Survey of Current Genetic Counseling Practice.

Authors:  Emily Suskin; Laura Hercher; Kathleen Erskine Aaron; Komal Bajaj
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 9.  Have we done our last amniocentesis? Updates on cell-free DNA for Down syndrome screening.

Authors:  Kathryn J Gray; Louise E Wilkins-Haug
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-03-17

Review 10.  Cell-Free DNA Screening: Complexities and Challenges of Clinical Implementation.

Authors:  Matthew R Grace; Emily Hardisty; Sarah K Dotters-Katz; Neeta L Vora; Jeffrey A Kuller
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Surv       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.347

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.