| Literature DB >> 28756761 |
Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian1,2, Elizabeth E Eklund1, Louis M Neveux1, Glenn E Palomaki1,2.
Abstract
Objectives To determine whether maternal plasma collected in cell-free DNA stabilizing tubes is suitable for measuring prenatal screening 'serum' markers. Methods Matched plasma and serum samples were collected from 41 second trimester and 42 first trimester non-Down's syndrome pregnancies. Second trimester samples were tested for alpha-fetoprotein, unconjugated estriol, human chorionic gonadotropin, and inhibin-A (Beckman Coulter DxI immunoassay). First trimester samples were tested for human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A. Method comparisons performed for each marker compared plasma and serum results. Down's syndrome likelihood ratios in serum and plasma were compared. Results Plasma and serum results for all markers were highly correlated ( r > 0.983) but for all, plasma results differed, usually by proportional amounts. After conversion to multiples of the median using sample type-specific medians, the logarithmic standard deviations in serum and plasma did not differ (all p > 0.37). Likelihood ratios for the first and second trimester marker combinations were highly correlated and closely agreed (log likelihood ratios range 1.005 to 1.032; 1.000 indicates complete agreement). Conclusions These results using specialized plasma collection tubes are similar to those of our earlier study showing that plasma collected in EDTA tubes is suitable for 'serum' Down's syndrome screening. Laboratories must account for proportional changes by computing new plasma medians or modifying existing serum medians. Using a portion of the plasma from cell-free DNA collection tubes for 'serum screening' may have an advantage in programmes that are reflexively testing cell-free DNA, as only one sample type need be collected.Entities:
Keywords: Down’s syndrome screening; Streck; cell-free DNA; method comparison; plasma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28756761 DOI: 10.1177/0969141316670193
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Screen ISSN: 0969-1413 Impact factor: 2.136