-
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Jun 2022Women's autonomy and an inclusive society for all individuals are highly valued in Norway. The Norwegian Biotechnology Act changed in 2020 allowing first-trimester...
Women's autonomy and an inclusive society for all individuals are highly valued in Norway. The Norwegian Biotechnology Act changed in 2020 allowing first-trimester screening and cell-free DNA for common trisomies to all pregnant women. However, implementing non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in a public antenatal care program is difficult, because many patients, politicians, and medical professionals do not consider trisomy 21 a severe medical disease. Screening for trisomies at an early gestation might inevitably lead to an increase in pregnancy terminations and making cost-benefit calculations is ethically challenging. Moreover, offering NIPT to all pregnant women is debatable because of the lower prevalence of fetal trisomies in younger women. Therefore, appropriate genetic pre-test counseling is essential. Furthermore, organizing the service between private institutions and public hospitals poses another debate and challenges both quality and equal access to health services for women across the country.
Topics: Down Syndrome; Female; Genetic Testing; Humans; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Prenatal Diagnosis; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome
PubMed: 35332520
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14351 -
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Jan 2017The aim of this study was to review the performance of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for detection of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (T21, T18 and T13) in a general... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Analysis of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal blood for detection of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 in a general pregnant population and in a high risk population - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study was to review the performance of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for detection of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (T21, T18 and T13) in a general pregnant population as well as to update the data on high-risk pregnancies.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. Methodological quality was rated using QUADAS and scientific evidence using GRADE. Summary measures of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model.
RESULTS
In a general pregnant population, there is moderate evidence that the pooled sensitivity is 0.993 (95% CI 0.955-0.999) and specificity was 0.999 (95% CI 0.998-0.999) for the analysis of T21. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for T13 and T18 was not calculated in this population due to the low number of studies. In a high-risk pregnant population, there is moderate evidence that the pooled sensitivities for T21 and T18 are 0.998 (95% CI 0.981-0.999) and 0.977 (95% CI 0.958-0.987) respectively, and low evidence that the pooled sensitivity for T13 is 0.975 (95% CI 0.819-0.997). The pooled specificity for all three trisomies is 0.999 (95% CI 0.998-0.999).
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first meta-analysis using GRADE that shows that NIPT performs well as a screen for trisomy 21 in a general pregnant population. Although the false positive rate is low compared with first trimester combined screening, women should still be advised to confirm a positive result by invasive testing if termination of pregnancy is under consideration.
Topics: Cell-Free System; Chromosome Disorders; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 13; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 18; DNA; Down Syndrome; Female; Genetic Testing; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, High-Risk; Prenatal Diagnosis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 27779757
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13047 -
Scientific Reports Sep 2021The aim of present study was to assess the karyotypes of amniotic fluid cells and find the frequency of chromosomal abnormalities and their significance in clinical...
The aim of present study was to assess the karyotypes of amniotic fluid cells and find the frequency of chromosomal abnormalities and their significance in clinical setting. A total of 15,401 pregnant women were assessed from March 2016 to May 2019, and 14,968 amniotic fluid samples were successfully cultured. These fetuses were grouped according to different indications including advanced maternal age, abnormal nuchal translucency (NT) values, positive first/second trimester screening results, high risk NIPT results, very low PAPP-A and free β-hCG multiples of the normal median (MoM) results, abnormal ultrasound findings or previous history of chromosomal abnormalities. Results indicated the presence of normal karyotype in 90.2% (13,497/14,968) of fetuses. Totally, 46.4% (6945/14,968) of fetuses were 46,XX and 43.8% (6552/14,968) had 46,XY chromosome pattern. A total of 1077 abnormal karyotypes were found among 14,968 fetuses, thus the rate of abnormal fetuses was calculated to be 7.2% (1072/14,968). Meanwhile, a total of 394 cases (2.8%) had a normal polymorphism in their karyotype. In other words, abnormal karyotypes were detected in one of 13.9 cases of patients underwent amniocentesis. Down syndrome, Edward's syndrome, abnormal mosaicisms and Patau's syndrome were detected in 4.4% (659/14,968), 0.57% (85/14,968), 0.49% (74/14,968) and 0.24% (36/14,968) of cases, respectively. Sex chromosomal abnormalities including Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome and 47,XXX karyotype were detected in 64 cases (0.43%). In this article, the rates of chromosomal abnormalities are compared between different groups of patients based on the advanced maternal age, abnormal NT values, very low PAPP-A and free β-hCG MoMs results, and positive FTS results. The current investigation provides insight into the most appropriate indications for amniocentesis in Iran.
Topics: Adult; Amniocentesis; Chromosome Aberrations; Congenital Abnormalities; Female; Humans; Iran; Prenatal Diagnosis
PubMed: 34593920
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-98928-3 -
PloS One 2023This study evaluated prenatal screening test performance and the prevalence of common aneuploidies at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. We collected data from screening tests...
This study evaluated prenatal screening test performance and the prevalence of common aneuploidies at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. We collected data from screening tests which are first-trimester test, quadruple test, and noninvasive prenatal tests (NIPT) between January 2016 and December 2020. Thirty percent (7,860/25,736) of pregnancies received prenatal screening tests for aneuploidies disorders, and 17.8% underwent prenatal diagnosis tests without screening. The highest percentage of screening tests was first-trimester test (64.5%). The high-risk results were 4% for first-trimester test, 6.6% for quadruple test, and 1.3% for NIPT. The serum screening tests for trisomy 13 and 18 had no true positives; therefore, we could not calculate sensitivity. For the first-trimester test, the sensitivity for trisomy 21 was 71.4% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 30.3-94.9); specificity for trisomy 13 and 18 was 99.9% (95% CI 99.8-99.9); and for trisomy 21 was 96.1% (95% CI 95.6-96.7). For the quadruple test, the specificity for trisomy 18 was 99.6% (95% CI 98.9-99.8), while the sensitivity and specificity for trisomy 21 were 50% (95% CI 26.7-97.3) and 93.9% (95% CI 92.2-95.3), respectively. NIPT had 100% sensitivity and specificity for trisomy 13, 18 and 21, and there were neither false negatives nor false positives. For pregnant women < 35 years, the prevalence of trisomy 13, 18, and 21 per 1,000 births was 0.28 (95% CI 0.12-0.67), 0.28 (95% CI 0.12-0.67), and 0.89 (95% CI 0.54-1.45), respectively. For pregnant women ≥35 years, the prevalence of trisomy 13, 18, and 21 per 1,000 births was 0.26 (95% CI 0.06-1.03), 2.59 (95% CI 1.67-4.01), and 7.25 (95% CI 5.58-9.41), respectively. For all pregnancies, the prevalence of trisomy 13, 18, and 21 per 1,000 births was 0.27 (95% CI 0.13-0.57), 0.97 (95% CI 0.66-1.44), 2.80 (95% CI 2.22-3.52), respectively.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Down Syndrome; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Tertiary Care Centers; Prevalence; Thailand; Prenatal Diagnosis; Aneuploidy; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 37079630
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284829 -
International Journal of Women's Health 2021This paper analyzes the clinical significance of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal chromosome aneuploidy in the screening of in vitro fertilization-embryo...
OBJECTIVE
This paper analyzes the clinical significance of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal chromosome aneuploidy in the screening of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF) pregnancies.
METHODS
The study subjects consisted of 3163 IVF-pregnant women who underwent NIPT at the Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University and Taizhou Hospital, Zhejiang Province from February 2015 to June 2019. Fetal or neonatal karyotype analysis was carried out in high-risk patients, with subsequent follow-up on pregnancy outcomes.
RESULTS
NIPT results of 3163 pregnant women suggested 20 cases of high-risk fetal chromosome aneuploidy, of which 2185 cases were a single pregnancy. Of the 13 cases of high-risk chromosome aneuploidy in single pregnancies, seven were true positive, and six were false positive according to fetal or newborn chromosomal karyotype diagnosis. Twin pregnancies accounted for 978 cases in which NIPT indicated seven cases of high-risk chromosome aneuploidy; six of these cases were true positive, and one case was false positive according to fetal or newborn chromosomal karyotype diagnosis. The specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive rate of trisomy 21 syndrome in IVF single embryo NIPT were 99.86%, 62.5%, and 0.14%, respectively. The specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive rate of trisomy 18 syndrome were 99.95%, 66.67%, and 0.05%, respectively. The specificity of trisomy 13 syndrome was 99.91%, and the false-positive rate was 0.09%. The specificity of trisomy 21 syndrome in IVF twin NIPT was 99.89%, the positive predictive value was 83.33%, and the false-positive rate was 0.11%. The specificity and positive predictive value of fetal trisomy 18 syndrome were 100.00%, and the false-positive rate of it were 0.00%. Sensitivity and false-negative rates were 100% in all cases.
CONCLUSION
NIPT is an ideal prenatal test for IVF-pregnant women due to its high sensitivity and specificity in screening for fetal aneuploidy.
PubMed: 34876859
DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S337249 -
PloS One 2016Methylation-based non-invasive prenatal testing of fetal aneuploidies is an alternative method that could possibly improve fetal aneuploidy diagnosis, especially for... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial
Methylation-based non-invasive prenatal testing of fetal aneuploidies is an alternative method that could possibly improve fetal aneuploidy diagnosis, especially for trisomy 13(T13) and trisomy 18(T18). Our aim was to study the methylation landscape in placenta DNA from trisomy 13, 18 and 21 pregnancies in an attempt to find trisomy-specific methylation differences better suited for non-invasive prenatal diagnosis. We have conducted high-resolution methylation specific bead chip microarray analyses assessing more than 450,000 CpGs analyzing placentas from 12 T21 pregnancies, 12 T18 pregnancies and 6 T13 pregnancies. We have compared the methylation landscape of the trisomic placentas to the methylation landscape from normal placental DNA and to maternal blood cell DNA. Comparing trisomic placentas to normal placentas we identified 217 and 219 differentially methylated CpGs for CVS T18 and CVS T13, respectively (delta β>0.2, FDR<0.05), but only three differentially methylated CpGs for T21. However, the methylation differences was only modest (delta β<0.4), making them less suitable as diagnostic markers. Gene ontology enrichment analysis revealed that the gene set connected to theT18 differentially methylated CpGs was highly enriched for GO terms related to"DNA binding" and "transcription factor binding" coupled to the RNA polymerase II transcription. In the gene set connected to the T13 differentially methylated CpGs we found no significant enrichments.
Topics: Chromosome Disorders; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 13; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 18; CpG Islands; DNA Methylation; Down Syndrome; Female; Humans; Microarray Analysis; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 27490343
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160319 -
PloS One 2020Birth defects are prenatal morphological or functional anomalies. Associations among them are studied to identify their etiopathogenesis. The graph theory methods allow...
Birth defects are prenatal morphological or functional anomalies. Associations among them are studied to identify their etiopathogenesis. The graph theory methods allow analyzing relationships among a complete set of anomalies. A graph consists of nodes which represent the entities (birth defects in the present work), and edges that join nodes indicating the relationships among them. The aim of the present study was to validate the graph theory methods to study birth defect associations. All birth defects monitoring records from the Estudio Colaborativo Latino Americano de Malformaciones Congénitas gathered between 1967 and 2017 were used. From around 5 million live and stillborn infants, 170,430 had one or more birth defects. Volume-adjusted Chi-Square was used to determine the association strength between two birth defects and to weight the graph edges. The complete birth defect graph showed a Log-Normal degree distribution and its characteristics differed from random, scale-free and small-world graphs. The graph comprised 118 nodes and 550 edges. Birth defects with the highest centrality values were nonspecific codes such as Other upper limb anomalies. After partition, the graph yielded 12 groups; most of them were recognizable and included conditions such as VATER and OEIS associations, and Patau syndrome. Our findings validate the graph theory methods to study birth defect associations. This method may contribute to identify underlying etiopathogeneses as well as to improve coding systems.
Topics: Congenital Abnormalities; Data Science; Databases, Factual; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Statistical Distributions
PubMed: 32442191
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233529 -
International Journal of Fertility &... Jan 2023Trisomy 13 (T13) and sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) are the vital causes of congenital malformations. This study was performed to identify the T13 and SCA with...
BACKGROUND
Trisomy 13 (T13) and sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) are the vital causes of congenital malformations. This study was performed to identify the T13 and SCA with screening tests in the first trimester of pregnancy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this cross-sectional study, first-trimester combined screening was conducted on 2100 pregnant women referred to Narges Genetics Laboratory, Ahvaz, Iran. Evaluating the first trimester screening tests, including nuchal translucency (NT), crown-rump length (CRL) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A), and free beta of human chorionic gonadotropin (fβhCG) was performed. For a definitive diagnosis of T13 and SCA syndrome, fetal karyotype was evaluated.
RESULTS
The average NT and CRL in high-risk group for T13 were 5.96 mm and 61.7 mm respectively and in high-risk groups for SCA were 3.7 mm and 75.9 mm, respectively. Significant correlation was observed among NT, CRL and T13, SCA (P<0.05). The average serum fβhCG and PAAP-A levels in high-risk group for T13 were 0.42 and 0.31, respectively. Significant correlation was observed between decrease fβhCG, PAPP-A and T13 levels and increase fβhCG levels and SCA levels (P<0.05). No Significant correlation was observed between PAPP-A levels and SCA levels (P>0.05).
CONCLUSION
Using special software and karyotype testing, the prenatal screening tests based on the maternal age and gestational age in the first trimester of pregnancy may determine the major risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities.
PubMed: 36617200
DOI: 10.22074/ijfs.2022.542511.1220 -
PLoS Computational Biology Dec 2021Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a powerful screening method for fetal aneuploidy detection, relying on laboratory and computational analysis of cell-free DNA....
Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a powerful screening method for fetal aneuploidy detection, relying on laboratory and computational analysis of cell-free DNA. Although several published computational NIPT analysis tools are available, no prior comprehensive, head-to-head accuracy comparison of the various tools has been published. Here, we compared the outcome accuracies obtained for clinically validated samples with five commonly used computational NIPT aneuploidy analysis tools (WisecondorX, NIPTeR, NIPTmer, RAPIDR, and GIPseq) across various sequencing depths (coverage) and fetal DNA fractions. The sample set included cases of fetal trisomy 21 (Down syndrome), trisomy 18 (Edwards syndrome), and trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome). We determined that all of the compared tools were considerably affected by lower sequencing depths, such that increasing proportions of undetected trisomy cases (false negatives) were observed as the sequencing depth decreased. We summarised our benchmarking results and highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of each computational NIPT software. To conclude, trisomy detection for lower coverage NIPT samples (e.g. 2.5M reads per sample) is technically possible but can, with some NIPT tools, produce troubling rates of inaccurate trisomy detection, especially in low-FF samples.
Topics: Aneuploidy; Computational Biology; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted; Female; Humans; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Pregnancy; Software; Whole Genome Sequencing
PubMed: 34928946
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009684 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2017Common fetal aneuploidies include Down syndrome (trisomy 21 or T21), Edward syndrome (trisomy 18 or T18), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13 or T13), Turner syndrome (45,X),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Common fetal aneuploidies include Down syndrome (trisomy 21 or T21), Edward syndrome (trisomy 18 or T18), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13 or T13), Turner syndrome (45,X), Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY), Triple X syndrome (47,XXX) and 47,XYY syndrome (47,XYY). Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies is standard care in many countries, but current biochemical and ultrasound tests have high false negative and false positive rates. The discovery of fetal circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) in maternal blood offers the potential for genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing (gNIPT) as a more accurate screening method. Two approaches used for gNIPT are massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS) and targeted massively parallel sequencing (TMPS).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of MPSS and TMPS for gNIPT as a first-tier test in unselected populations of pregnant women undergoing aneuploidy screening or as a second-tier test in pregnant women considered to be high risk after first-tier screening for common fetal aneuploidies. The gNIPT results were confirmed by a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or neonatal clinical examination.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched 13 databases (including MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science) from 1 January 2007 to 12 July 2016 without any language, search filter or publication type restrictions. We also screened reference lists of relevant full-text articles, websites of private prenatal diagnosis companies and conference abstracts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies could include pregnant women of any age, ethnicity and gestational age with singleton or multifetal pregnancy. The women must have had a screening test for fetal aneuploidy by MPSS or TMPS and a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or medical records from birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction and quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool). Where possible, hierarchical models or simpler alternatives were used for meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixty-five studies of 86,139 pregnant women (3141 aneuploids and 82,998 euploids) were included. No study was judged to be at low risk of bias across the four domains of the QUADAS-2 tool but applicability concerns were generally low. Of the 65 studies, 42 enrolled pregnant women at high risk, five recruited an unselected population and 18 recruited cohorts with a mix of prior risk of fetal aneuploidy. Among the 65 studies, 44 evaluated MPSS and 21 evaluated TMPS; of these, five studies also compared gNIPT with a traditional screening test (biochemical, ultrasound or both). Forty-six out of 65 studies (71%) reported gNIPT assay failure rate, which ranged between 0% and 25% for MPSS, and between 0.8% and 7.5% for TMPS.In the population of unselected pregnant women, MPSS was evaluated by only one study; the study assessed T21, T18 and T13. TMPS was assessed for T21 in four studies involving unselected cohorts; three of the studies also assessed T18 and 13. In pooled analyses (88 T21 cases, 22 T18 cases, eight T13 cases and 20,649 unaffected pregnancies (non T21, T18 and T13)), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of TMPS was 99.2% (78.2% to 100%), 90.9% (70.0% to 97.7%) and 65.1% (9.16% to 97.2%) for T21, T18 and T13, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificity was above 99.9% for T21, T18 and T13.In high-risk populations, MPSS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in 30, 28, 20 and 12 studies, respectively. In pooled analyses (1048 T21 cases, 332 T18 cases, 128 T13 cases and 15,797 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of MPSS was 99.7% (98.0% to 100%), 97.8% (92.5% to 99.4%), 95.8% (86.1% to 98.9%) and 91.7% (78.3% to 97.1%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificities (95% CI) were 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.8% (99.8% to 99.9%) and 99.6% (98.9% to 99.8%). In this risk group, TMPS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in six, five, two and four studies. In pooled analyses (246 T21 cases, 112 T18 cases, 20 T13 cases and 4282 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% CI) of TMPS was 99.2% (96.8% to 99.8%), 98.2% (93.1% to 99.6%), 100% (83.9% to 100%) and 92.4% (84.1% to 96.5%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X respectively. The clinical specificities were above 100% for T21, T18 and T13 and 99.8% (98.3% to 100%) for 45,X. Indirect comparisons of MPSS and TMPS for T21, T18 and 45,X showed no statistical difference in clinical sensitivity, clinical specificity or both. Due to limited data, comparative meta-analysis of MPSS and TMPS was not possible for T13.We were unable to perform meta-analyses of gNIPT for 47,XXX, 47,XXY and 47,XYY because there were very few or no studies in one or more risk groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
These results show that MPSS and TMPS perform similarly in terms of clinical sensitivity and specificity for the detection of fetal T31, T18, T13 and sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA). However, no study compared the two approaches head-to-head in the same cohort of patients. The accuracy of gNIPT as a prenatal screening test has been mainly evaluated as a second-tier screening test to identify pregnancies at very low risk of fetal aneuploidies (T21, T18 and T13), thus avoiding invasive procedures. Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing methods appear to be sensitive and highly specific for detection of fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in high-risk populations. There is paucity of data on the accuracy of gNIPT as a first-tier aneuploidy screening test in a population of unselected pregnant women. With respect to the replacement of invasive tests, the performance of gNIPT observed in this review is not sufficient to replace current invasive diagnostic tests.We conclude that given the current data on the performance of gNIPT, invasive fetal karyotyping is still the required diagnostic approach to confirm the presence of a chromosomal abnormality prior to making irreversible decisions relative to the pregnancy outcome. However, most of the gNIPT studies were prone to bias, especially in terms of the selection of participants.
Topics: Aneuploidy; Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Chromosome Disorders; Disorders of Sex Development; Female; Fetal Diseases; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, High-Risk; Prenatal Diagnosis
PubMed: 29125628
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011767.pub2