Literature DB >> 30940924

Adherence of cell-free DNA noninvasive prenatal screens to ACMG recommendations.

Brian G Skotko1,2, Megan A Allyse3, Komal Bajaj4, Robert G Best5, Susan Klugman4, Mark Leach6, Stephanie Meredith6, Marsha Michie7, Katie Stoll8, Anthony R Gregg9.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for fetal aneuploidy via cell-free DNA has been commercially available in the United States since 2011. In 2016, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) issued a position statement with specific recommendations for testing laboratories. We sought to evaluate adherence to these recommendations.
METHODS: We focused on commercial laboratories performing NIPS testing in the United States as of 1 January 2018. Sample laboratory reports and other materials were scored for compliance with ACMG recommendations. Variables scored for common and sex chromosome aneuploidy detection included detection rate, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and fetal fraction. Labs that performed analysis of copy-number variants and results for aneuploidies other than those commonly reported were identified. Available patient education materials were similarly evaluated.
RESULTS: Nine of 10 companies reported fetal fraction in their reports, and 8 of 10 did not offer screening for autosomal aneuploidies beyond trisomy 13, 18, and 21. There was inconsistency in the application and reporting of other measures recommended by ACMG.
CONCLUSIONS: Laboratories varied in the degree to which they met ACMG position statement recommendations. No company adhered to all laboratory guidance.

Entities:  

Keywords:  NIPS; NIPT; noninvasive prenatal screens; noninvasive prenatal tests; trisomy 21

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30940924     DOI: 10.1038/s41436-019-0485-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  5 in total

1.  Quality Assurance of Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPS) for Fetal Aneuploidy Using Positive Predictive Values as Outcome Measures.

Authors:  Wendy DiNonno; Zachary Demko; Kimberly Martin; Paul Billings; Melissa Egbert; Susan Zneimer; Dianne Keen-Kim; Peter Benn
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 4.241

2.  Inaccuracies and shortcomings in "Adherence of cell-free DNA noninvasive prenatal screens to ACMG recommendations".

Authors:  Katherine Johansen Taber; Carrie Haverty; Susan Hancock; James Goldberg
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 8.864

Review 3.  Factors Affecting the Fetal Fraction in Noninvasive Prenatal Screening: A Review.

Authors:  Cechuan Deng; Shanling Liu
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.418

4.  Prenatal screening in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing: a Nationwide cross-sectional survey of obstetrician knowledge, attitudes and clinical practice.

Authors:  Liying Yang; Wei Ching Tan
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Cell-Free DNA Screening for Sex Chromosome Abnormalities and Pregnancy Outcomes, 2018-2020: A Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Yanmei Lu; Shihao Zhou; Siyuan Linpeng; Siyi Ding; Shihong Li; Yujiao Li; Liangcheng Shi; Jun He; Yalan Liu
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-01-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.