Literature DB >> 27131582

Noninvasive prenatal screening or advanced diagnostic testing: caveat emptor.

Mark I Evans1, Ronald J Wapner2, Richard L Berkowitz2.   

Abstract

The past few years have seen extraordinary advances in prenatal genetic practice led by 2 major technological advances; next-generation sequencing of cell-free DNA in the maternal plasma to noninvasively identify fetal chromosome abnormalities, and microarray analysis of chorionic villus sampling and amniotic fluid samples, resulting in increased cytogenetic resolution. Noninvasive prenatal screening of cell-free DNA has demonstrated sensitivity and specificity for trisomy 21 superior to all previous screening approaches with slightly lower performance for other common aneuploidies. These tests have rapidly captured an increasing market share, with substantial reductions in the number of chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis performed suggesting that physicians and patients regard such screening approaches as an equivalent replacement for diagnostic testing. Simultaneously, many clinical programs have noted significant decreases in patient counseling. In 2012 the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development funded a blinded comparison of karyotype with the emerging technology of array comparative genomic hybridization showing that in patients with a normal karyotype, 2.5% had a clinically relevant microdeletion or duplication identified. In pregnancies with an ultrasound-detected structural anomaly, 6% had an incremental finding, and of those with a normal scan, 1.6% had a copy number variant. For patients of any age with a normal ultrasound and karyotype, the chance of a pathogenic copy number variant is greater than 1%, similar to the age-related risk of aneuploidy in the fetus of a 38 year old. This risk is 4-fold higher than the risk of trisomy 21 in a woman younger than 30 years and 5- to 10-fold higher than the present accepted risk of a diagnostic procedure. Based on this, we contend that every patient, regardless of her age, be educated about these risks and offered the opportunity to have a diagnostic procedure with array comparative genomic hybridization performed.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  array comparative genomic hybridization; cell-free fetal DNA; chorionic villus sampling; fetal chromosome abnormalities; maternal serum combined screening; next-generation sequencing

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27131582     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.04.029

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  Resistance to Change.

Authors:  Mark I Evans; David W Britt
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 2.  The current and future impact of genome-wide sequencing on fetal precision medicine.

Authors:  Riwa Sabbagh; Ignatia B Van den Veyver
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 4.132

3.  The contingent use of cell-free fetal DNA for prenatal screening of trisomies 21, 18, 13 in pregnant women within a national health service: A budget impact analysis.

Authors:  Federico Prefumo; Davide Paolini; Giulia Speranza; Marilena Palmisano; Matteo Dionisi; Lamberto Camurri
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Factors associated with common and atypical chromosome abnormalities after positive combined first-trimester screening in Chinese women: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Annisa Mak; Helena Lee; C F Poon; S L Kwok; Teresa Ma; K Y K Chan; Anita Kan; Mary Tang; K Y Leung
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Usefulness of copy number variant detection following monogenic disease exclusion in prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  Panlai Shi; Yanjie Xia; Qianqian Li; Xiangdong Kong
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 1.730

6.  Population-based impact of noninvasive prenatal screening on screening and diagnostic testing for fetal aneuploidy.

Authors:  Lisa Hui; Briohny Hutchinson; Alice Poulton; Jane Halliday
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 7.  Understanding False Negative in Prenatal Testing.

Authors:  Mark I Evans; Ming Chen; David W Britt
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-17

8.  Follow-up in Patients With Non-invasive Prenatal Screening Failures: A Reflection on the Choice of Further Prenatal Diagnosis.

Authors:  Sha Liu; Hongqian Liu; Jianlong Liu; Ting Bai; Xiaosha Jing; Tianyu Xia; Cechuan Deng; Yunyun Liu; Jing Cheng; Xiang Wei; Lingling Xing; Yuan Luo; Quanfang Zhou; Qian Zhu
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 4.599

9.  Noninvasive prenatal testing for chromosome aneuploidies and subchromosomal microdeletions/microduplications in a cohort of 42,910 single pregnancies with different clinical features.

Authors:  Yibo Chen; Qi Yu; Xiongying Mao; Wei Lei; Miaonan He; Wenbo Lu
Journal:  Hum Genomics       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 4.639

10.  Prenatal diagnosis of 913 fetuses samples using copy number variation sequencing.

Authors:  Liubing Lan; Lingna She; Bosen Zhang; Yanhong He; Zhiyuan Zheng
Journal:  J Gene Med       Date:  2021-03-21       Impact factor: 4.565

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.