Literature DB >> 27549925

Accuracy of first-trimester combined test in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13.

M Santorum1, D Wright2, A Syngelaki1, N Karagioti1, K H Nicolaides1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of a previously developed model for the first-trimester combined test in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13.
METHODS: This was a prospective validation study of screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by assessment of a combination of maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency, fetal heart rate and serum free β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation in 108 982 singleton pregnancies undergoing routine care in three maternity hospitals. A previously published algorithm was used to calculate patient-specific risks for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 in each patient. The detection rate (DR) and false-positive rate (FPR) at estimated risk cut-offs from 1 in 2 to 1 in 1000 were determined. The proportions of trisomies detected were compared to their expected values in different risk groups.
RESULTS: In the study population, there were 108 112 (99.2%) cases with normal fetal karyotype or birth of a phenotypically normal neonate and 870 (0.8%) cases with abnormal karyotype, including trisomy 21 (n = 432), trisomy 18 (n = 166), trisomy 13 (n = 56), monosomy X (n = 63), triploidy (n = 35) or other aneuploidy (n = 118). The screen-positive rates, standardized according to the maternal age distribution in England and Wales in 2011, of fetuses with abnormal or normal karyotype were compatible with those predicted from the previous model; at a risk cut-off of 1 in 100, the FPR was about 4% and the DRs for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 were 90%, 97% and 92%, respectively. There was evidence that the algorithm overestimated risk. This could, to some degree, reflect under-ascertainment in pregnancies ending in miscarriage or stillbirth.
CONCLUSION: In a prospective validation study, the first-trimester combined test detected 90%, 97% and 92% of trisomies 21, 18 and 13, respectively, as well as > 95% of cases of monosomy X and triploidies and > 50% of other chromosomal abnormalities, at a FPR of 4%.
Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chromosomal abnormalities; first-trimester combined test; screening; trisomy 13; trisomy 18; trisomy 21

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27549925     DOI: 10.1002/uog.17283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  21 in total

1.  Risk Assessment at 11-14-Week Antenatal Visit: A Tertiary Referral Center Experience from South India.

Authors:  Anusha Vellamkondu; Akhila Vasudeva; Rajeshwari G Bhat; Asha Kamath; Sapna V Amin; Lavanya Rai; Pratap Kumar
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2017-04-08

2.  Rearranging Deck Chairs on a Sinking Ship? : Some Reflections on Ethics and Reproduction Looking Back at 2017 and Ahead at 2018.

Authors:  Silvia Camporesi
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 1.352

3.  Non-invasive prenatal testing in mitigating concerns from invasive prenatal diagnostic testing: retrospective assessment of utility in an academic healthcare system in the US.

Authors:  Kibum Kim; Linda Kaitlyn Craft
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.006

4.  Prenatal tests for chromosomal abnormalities detection (PTCAD): pregnant women's knowledge in an Italian Population.

Authors:  Paola Quaresima; Federica Visconti; Elena Greco; Roberta Venturella; Costantino Di Carlo
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 5.  The Potential Role of miRNAs as Predictive Biomarkers in Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

Authors:  Iman Imtiyaz Ahmed Juvale; Ahmad Tarmizi Che Has
Journal:  J Mol Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 3.444

Review 6.  Non-invasive prenatal screening: A 20-year experience in Italy.

Authors:  Chiara Palka; Paolo Guanciali-Franchi; Elisena Morizio; Melissa Alfonsi; Marco Papponetti; Giulia Sabbatinelli; Giandomenico Palka; Giuseppe Calabrese; Peter Benn
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X       Date:  2019-05-18

7.  A contingent model for cell-free DNA testing to detect fetal aneuploidy after first trimester combined screening.

Authors:  Carmen Cotarelo-Pérez; Raluca Oancea-Ionescu; Eloy Asenjo-de-la-Fuente; Dolores Ortega-de-Heredia; Patricia Soler-Ruiz; Pluvio Coronado-Martín; María Fenollar-Cortés
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X       Date:  2019-01-15

8.  Prenatal Screening of Trisomy 21: Could Oxidative Stress Markers Play a Role?

Authors:  Angelika Buczyńska; Iwona Sidorkiewicz; Sławomir Ławicki; Adam Jacek Krętowski; Monika Zbucka-Krętowska
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 9.  Metabolomics in Prenatal Medicine: A Review.

Authors:  Giovanni Monni; Luigi Atzori; Valentina Corda; Francesca Dessolis; Ambra Iuculano; K Joseph Hurt; Federica Murgia
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-06-25

10.  Changes in the Detection and Management of Foetal Trisomies over Time.

Authors:  Natalia Prodan; Markus Hoopmann; Harald Abele; Philipp Wagner; Diethelm Wallwiener; Sara Brucker; Karl Oliver Kagan
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 2.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.