Literature DB >> 25004354

Single-nucleotide polymorphism-based noninvasive prenatal screening in a high-risk and low-risk cohort.

Eugene Pergament1, Howard Cuckle, Bernhard Zimmermann, Milena Banjevic, Styrmir Sigurjonsson, Allison Ryan, Megan P Hall, Michael Dodd, Phil Lacroute, Melissa Stosic, Nikhil Chopra, Nathan Hunkapiller, Dennis E Prosen, Sallie McAdoo, Zachary Demko, Asim Siddiqui, Matthew Hill, Matthew Rabinowitz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate performance of a single-nucleotide polymorphism-based noninvasive prenatal screen for fetal aneuploidy in high-risk and low-risk populations on single venopuncture.
METHODS: One thousand sixty-four maternal blood samples from 7 weeks of gestation and beyond were included; 1,051 were within specifications and 518 (49.3%) were low risk. Cell-free DNA was amplified, sequenced, and analyzed using the Next-generation Aneuploidy Test Using SNPs algorithm. Samples were called as trisomies 21, 18, 13, or monosomy X, or euploid, and male or female.
RESULTS: Nine hundred sixty-six samples (91.9%) successfully generated a cell-free DNA result. Among these, sensitivity was 100% for trisomy 21 (58/58, confidence interval [CI] 93.8-100%), trisomy 13 (12/12, CI 73.5-100%), and fetal sex (358/358 female, CI 99.0-100%; 418/418 male, CI 99.1-100%), 96.0% for trisomy 18 (24/25, CI 79.7-99.9%), and 90% for monosomy X (9/10, CI 55.5-99.8%). Specificity for trisomies 21 and 13 was 100% (905/905, CI 99.6-100%; and 953/953, CI 99.6-100%, respectively) and for trisomy 18 and monosomy X was 99.9% (938/939, CI 99.4-100%; and 953/954, CI 99.4-100%, respectively). However, 16% (20/125) of aneuploid samples did not return a result; 50% (10/20) had a fetal fraction below the 1.5th percentile of euploid pregnancies. Aneuploidy rate was significantly higher in these samples (P<.001, odds ratio 9.2, CI 4.4-19.0). Sensitivity and specificity did not differ in low-risk and high-risk populations.
CONCLUSIONS: This noninvasive prenatal screen performed with high sensitivity and specificity in high-risk and low-risk cohorts. Aneuploid samples were significantly more likely to not return a result; the number of aneuploidy samples was especially increased among samples with low fetal fraction. This underscores the importance of redraws or, in rare cases, invasive procedures based on low fetal fraction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25004354      PMCID: PMC4144440          DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000363

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  62 in total

1.  Genetic Counselors' Perspectives About Cell-Free DNA: Experiences, Challenges, and Expectations for Obstetricians.

Authors:  Patricia K Agatisa; Mary Beth Mercer; Marissa Coleridge; Ruth M Farrell
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Repeated failed non-invasive prenatal testing in a woman with immune thrombocytopenia and antiphospholipid syndrome: lessons learnt.

Authors:  C Y Y Hui; W C Tan; E L Tan; L K Tan
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2016-12-05

Review 3.  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

4.  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 5.  Benefits and limitations of prenatal screening for Prader-Willi syndrome.

Authors:  Merlin G Butler
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 6.  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 7.  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

8.  Single Nucleotide Polymorphism-Based Analysis of Cell-Free Fetal DNA in 3000 Cases from Germany and Austria.

Authors:  B Eiben; M Krapp; H Borth; N Kutur; P Kreiselmaier; R Glaubitz; J Deutinger; E Merz
Journal:  Ultrasound Int Open       Date:  2015-06-26

9.  Biological explanations for discordant noninvasive prenatal test results: Preliminary data and lessons learned.

Authors:  Louise Wilkins-Haug; Chengsheng Zhang; Eliza Cerveira; Mallory Ryan; Adam Mil-Homens; Qihui Zhu; Honey Reddi; Charles Lee; Diana W Bianchi
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.050

10.  Single Nucleotide Polymorphism-Based Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: Experience in India.

Authors:  Ishwar Chander Verma; Ratna Puri; Eswarachary Venkataswamy; Tulika Tayal; Sheela Nampoorthiri; Chitra Andrew; Madhulika Kabra; Rashmi Bagga; Mamatha Gowda; Meenu Batra; Sridevi Hegde; Anita Kaul; Neerja Gupta; Pallavi Mishra; Jayshree Ganapathi Subramanian; Shruti Lingaiah; Riyaz Akhtar; Francis Kidangan; R Chandran; C Kiran; G R Ravi Kumar; V L Ramprasad; Priya Kadam
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2018-01-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.