Hui Zhu1,2, Xiaoxiao Jin2, Yuqing Xu2, Weihua Zhang1, Xiaodan Liu1, Jinglei Jin2, Yeqing Qian2, Minyue Dong3. 1. Jiaxing University Affiliated Women and Children Hospital, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, 314051, China. 2. Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Zhejiang, 310006, Hangzhou, China. 3. Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Zhejiang, 310006, Hangzhou, China. dongmy@zju.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) is widely used as the alternative choice for pregnant women at high-risk of fetal aneuploidy. However, whether NIPS has a good detective efficiency for pregnant women at advanced maternal age (AMA) has not been fully studied especially in Chinese women. METHODS: Twenty-nine thousand three hundred forty-three pregnant women at AMA with singleton pregnancy who received NIPS and followed-up were recruited. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the Youden Index for detecting fetal chromosomal aneuploidies were analyzed. The relationship between maternal age and common fetal chromosomal aneuploidy was observed. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of NIPS for detecting fetal trisomy 21 were 99.11, 99.96, 90.98, and 100%, respectively. These same parameters for detecting fetal trisomy 18 were 100, 99.94, 67.92, and 100%, respectively. Finally, these parameters for detecting trisomy 13 were 100, 99.96, 27.78, and 100%, respectively. The prevalence of fetal trisomy 21 increased exponentially with maternal age. The high-risk percentage incidence rate of fetal trisomy 21 was significantly higher in the pregnant women at 37 years old or above than that in pregnant women at 35 to 37 years old. (Youden index = 37). CONCLUSION: It is indicated that NIPS is an effective prenatal screening method for pregnant women at AMA.
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) is widely used as the alternative choice for pregnant women at high-risk of fetal aneuploidy. However, whether NIPS has a good detective efficiency for pregnant women at advanced maternal age (AMA) has not been fully studied especially in Chinese women. METHODS: Twenty-nine thousand three hundred forty-three pregnant women at AMA with singleton pregnancy who received NIPS and followed-up were recruited. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the Youden Index for detecting fetal chromosomal aneuploidies were analyzed. The relationship between maternal age and common fetal chromosomal aneuploidy was observed. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of NIPS for detecting fetal trisomy 21 were 99.11, 99.96, 90.98, and 100%, respectively. These same parameters for detecting fetal trisomy 18 were 100, 99.94, 67.92, and 100%, respectively. Finally, these parameters for detecting trisomy 13 were 100, 99.96, 27.78, and 100%, respectively. The prevalence of fetal trisomy 21 increased exponentially with maternal age. The high-risk percentage incidence rate of fetal trisomy 21 was significantly higher in the pregnant women at 37 years old or above than that in pregnant women at 35 to 37 years old. (Youden index = 37). CONCLUSION: It is indicated that NIPS is an effective prenatal screening method for pregnant women at AMA.
Authors: T K Lau; S W Cheung; P S S Lo; A N Pursley; M K Chan; F Jiang; H Zhang; W Wang; L F J Jong; O K C Yuen; H Y C Chan; W S K Chan; K W Choy Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: Rossa W K Chiu; Ranjit Akolekar; Yama W L Zheng; Tak Y Leung; Hao Sun; K C Allen Chan; Fiona M F Lun; Attie T J I Go; Elizabeth T Lau; William W K To; Wing C Leung; Rebecca Y K Tang; Sidney K C Au-Yeung; Helena Lam; Yu Y Kung; Xiuqing Zhang; John M G van Vugt; Ryoko Minekawa; Mary H Y Tang; Jun Wang; Cees B M Oudejans; Tze K Lau; Kypros H Nicolaides; Y M Dennis Lo Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-01-11
Authors: Jacob A Canick; Glenn E Palomaki; Edward M Kloza; Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian; James E Haddow Journal: Prenat Diagn Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 3.050
Authors: Anthony O Odibo; Diane L Gray; Jeffrey M Dicke; David M Stamilio; George A Macones; James P Crane Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Francesca R Grati; Francesca Malvestiti; Jose C P B Ferreira; Komal Bajaj; Elisa Gaetani; Cristina Agrati; Beatrice Grimi; Francesca Dulcetti; Anna M Ruggeri; Simona De Toffol; Federico Maggi; Ronald Wapner; Susan Gross; Giuseppe Simoni Journal: Genet Med Date: 2014-02-13 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Darina Czamara; Cristiana Cruceanu; Marius Lahti-Pulkkinen; Linda Dieckmann; Maik Ködel; Susann Sauer; Monika Rex-Haffner; Sara Sammallahti; Eero Kajantie; Hannele Laivuori; Jari Lahti; Katri Räikkönen; Elisabeth B Binder Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-09-28 Impact factor: 6.208