| Literature DB >> 30975179 |
Ping Hu1, Dong Liang1, Yangyi Chen2,3,4, Ying Lin1, Fengchang Qiao1, Hang Li1, Ting Wang5, Chunfang Peng2,3,4, Donghong Luo2,3,4, Hailiang Liu6,7,8, Zhengfeng Xu9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) based on cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) has rapidly been applied into clinic. However, the reliability of this method largely depends on the concentration of cffDNA in the maternal plasma. The chance of test failure results or false negative results would increase when cffDNA fraction is low. In this study, we set out to develop a method to enrich the cffDNA for NIPS based on the size difference between cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of fetal origin and maternal origin, and to evaluate whether the new NIPS method can improve the test quality.Entities:
Keywords: False negative; NIPS; Test failure; cfDNA screening; cffDNA enrichment; cffDNA fraction
Year: 2019 PMID: 30975179 PMCID: PMC6460836 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-019-1871-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Fig. 1The effect of cffDNA enrichment. a Foldchange of cffDNA fraction in 10 different bins, including [100, 110), [110, 120), [120, 130), [130, 140), [140, 150), [150, 160), [160, 170), [170, 180), [180, 190), [190, 200), calculated using reads portion of the Y chromosome. b Alteration of read length distribution after size-selection using our customized beads with different dosages. c The portion of short reads (< 160) increased after size-selection using our customized beads with different dosages. d The Z-score of ChrY increased after size-selection using our customized beads with different dosages
Fig. 2Comparison between the cffDNA fractions from new NIPS method and the ordinary method tested on the 902 pregnancies with male fetus. a cffDNA fractions of the 902 samples using the two NIPS methods. Blue dots represented the sorted cffDNA fractions from ordinary NIPS, while red dots represent that of the corresponding samples using NIPS method with enrichment. b Boxplot for cffDNA fraction between the two NIPS methods
Comparison between results of NIPS with and without cffDNA enrichment on 1404 clinical samples
| Method | NIPS without | NIPS with |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 1404 | 1404 |
| Test failure | 10 (0.7%) | 1 (0.1%) |
| Test positive | 8 | 10 |
| True positive | 5 | 5 |
| Test negative | 1394 | 1394 |
| True negative | 1397 | 1399 |
| Sensitivity | 100% | 100% |
| Specificity | 99.79% | 99.64% |
| PPV | 62.50% | 50% |
| NPV | 100% | 100% |
NIPS noninvasive prenatal screening, cffDNA cell-free fetal DNA, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value
Performance of NIPS using cffDNA enrichment on 11 false negative samples
| No. | Karyotype | NIPS without cffDNA enrichment | NIPS with cffDNA enrichment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fetal fraction (%) | Z score | Fetal fraction (%) | Z score | ||
| FN1 | 47,XX,+ 21 | 5.6 | 2.41 | 15.6 | 11.92a |
| FN2 | 47,XY,+ 18 | 8.5 | − 0.41 | 18.6 | − 1.05 |
| FN3 | 47,XX,+ 21 | 4.8 | 1.14 | 11.4 | 5.076a |
| FN4 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 12.4 | 0.791 | 26.4 | 2.16 |
| FN5 | 47,XY,+ 18 | 7.1 | 0.313 | 15.2 | 1.687 |
| FN6 | 47,XY,+ 18 | 5.1 | 1.713 | 11.8 | 4.01a |
| FN7 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 11.2 | 0.163 | 18.8 | − 1.86 |
| FN8 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 9.2 | − 0.56 | 19 | 1.096 |
| FN9 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 7.5 | − 0.16 | 14.7 | 1.634 |
| FN10 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 6.4 | 2.031 | 14.6 | 10.14a |
| FN11 | 47,XY,+ 21 | 4.1 | 1.255 | 7.9 | 6.972a |
NIPS noninvasive prenatal screening, cffDNA cell-free fetal DNA, FN false negative
aPositive results using cffDNA enrichment method