Estimates for the sensitivity and false-positive rates for second trimester serum screening for Down syndrome and trisomy 18 with adjustment for cross-identification and double-positive results

Alterations of epigenetic landscape in Down syndrome carrying pregnancies: A systematic review of case-control studies

OBJECTIVE

Great attention is currently paid to both the pathogenetic mechanisms and non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) of Down syndrome (DS). It has been posited that dysregulation of epigenetic signatures including DNA methylation and microRNAs (miRNAs) crucially contribute to the pathomechanism of DS. Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review of case-control publications that have examined the differences in epigenetic landscape between pregnancies bearing euploid fetuses and those affected with DS to provide a focused insight into the pathophysiology of DS and also novel biomarkers for NIPD of DS.

STUDY DESIGN

Pertinent keywords were utilized to search into PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We enrolled studies that have compared the pattern of miRNAs expression profile or DNA methylation between pregnant women who carries DS fetuses and those with euploid fetuses.

RESULTS

An assessment of 599 articles resulted in, finally, 18 eligible studies (12 miRNAs and 6 DNA methylation). The most investigated miRNAs were those that are encoded by genes on chromosome 21 and more hypermethylation regions in DS fetuses than euploids with nearly evenly distribution on all chromosomes were found. Distinct mechanisms with potential therapeutic purposes have been put forward for the involvement of epigenetic perturbations in the etiopathogenesis of DS.

CONCLUSION

There is a disagreement in the recruiting of epigenetic biomarkers for NIPD of DS. This heterogeneity in results of the qualified publications emanates from confounding factors such as differences in demographic data of participants, analytical platforms, and study design. Hence, before harnessing epigenetic signatures for NIPD of DS, more experiments are required.

Isolated echogenic intracardiac foci and the role of cell-free fetal DNA: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

Cell-free fetal DNA (cfDNA) has been increasingly incorporated into prenatal aneuploidy screening paradigms given its relatively high sensitivity for Down syndrome (DS). This is often the case when fetal ultrasonographic soft markers are present, such as the relatively common echogenic intracardiac focus (EIF). We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a screening strategy that included cfDNA screening when an isolated EIF is identified in a low-risk population with prior aneuploidy screening.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was constructed using TreeAge software with probabilities derived from the literature. Our model compared cfDNA screening following isolated EIF detection in women less than 35 years with prior reassuring first trimester screen compared to a strategy of no further aneuploidy screening. Strategies were compared to generate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with a threshold of $100 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and applied to a theoretical cohort.

RESULTS

The cfDNA strategy resulted in 21 fewer DS births and 52 additional QALYs, however, increased costs by $51.3 million. This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $986 503; therefore, it was not a cost-effective strategy.

CONCLUSION

In a low-risk population with prior reassuring aneuploidy screening, it is not cost effective to offer cfDNA after identification of an isolated EIF.

Prenatal circulating microRNA signatures of foetal Down syndrome

The altered expression pattern of miRNAs might potentially reflect anomalies related to foetal chromosomal aberrations. The aim of the study was to determine the expression level of miRNAs in plasma of pregnant women with foetal Down syndrome (DS). Out of 198 amniocentesis performed at 15-18 weeks of gestation, within a group of 12 patients with foetal DS and 12 patients with uncomplicated pregnancies, who delivered healthy newborns at term, we examined the expression level of 800 miRNAs using the NanoString technology. Our study revealed that there are 6 miRNAs were upregulated (hsa-miR-15a, hsa-let-7d, hsa-miR-142, hsa-miR-23a, hsa-miR-199, hsa-miR-191) and 7 were downregulated (hsa-miR-1290, hsa-miR-1915, hsa-miR30e, hsa-miR-1260, hsa-miR-483, hsa-miR-548, hsa-miR-590) in plasma samples of women with foetal DS syndrome. The genes regulated by identified miRNAs are involved in central nervous system development, congenital abnormalities and heart defects. The results of the present study yielded information on DS-specific miRNA expression signature, which can further help to design a panel of miRNAs as a non-invasive test for DS diagnosis. We believe that identified miRNAs may attend in the pathogenesis of DS and would potentially make a significant role for the future preventive therapies.

Differences in prenatal aneuploidy screening among African-American women with hemoglobin S variants

OBJECTIVE

It has been shown that hemoglobinopathies increase the risk of pregnancy complications and placental dysfunction. This could alter the placental analytes examined during prenatal aneuploidy screening. Our objective was to determine whether there is a difference in maternal serum screening results for women with hemoglobin S variants (AS, SS, SC, S/beta thalassemia) compared with women with normal hemoglobin (AA).

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study in African-American women receiving aneuploidy screening at MedStar Washington Hospital Center from 2008 to 2015. We evaluated 79 women with hemoglobin S variants (69 AS and 10 sickle cell disease (SCD)) and 79 controls. Descriptive statistics (means, medians, and frequencies) were calculated for each group. For the continuous variables, differences in the averages between the two groups were tested using the t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test. Differences in the averages between three or more groups were tested using the analysis of variance test or the Kruskal-Wallis test.

RESULTS

Demographics were similar between cases and controls. The overall screen positive rate for Down syndrome among patients with sickle cell trait (AS) was 3% (2/69). For patients with SCD, the overall screen positive rate was 10% (1/10). None of the women in the control population (AA) has a positive Down syndrome screening result (0/79).

CONCLUSION

As expected, the screen positive rate in patients with hemoglobin S variants was higher than controls, however, patients with sickle cell trait do not appear to be at an increased risk for false-positive results with serum aneuploidy screening compared with the general population. We did, however, find an increased risk of false-positive quad screen results in patients with sickle cell disease.

First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive and false negative screening tests (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester ultrasound markers alone, and in combination with first trimester serum tests for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out extensive literature searches including MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), and The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (the Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 7). We checked reference lists and published review articles for additional potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of first trimester ultrasound screening, alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests (up to 14 weeks' gestation) for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 126 studies (152 publications) involving 1,604,040 fetuses (including 8454 Down's syndrome cases). Studies were generally good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Sixty test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 11 different ultrasound markers (nuchal translucency (NT), nasal bone, ductus venosus Doppler, maxillary bone length, fetal heart rate, aberrant right subclavian artery, frontomaxillary facial angle, presence of mitral gap, tricuspid regurgitation, tricuspid blood flow and iliac angle 90 degrees); 12 serum tests (inhibin A, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (ßhCG), total hCG, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), disintegrin and metalloprotease 12 (ADAM 12), placental growth factor (PlGF), placental growth hormone (PGH), invasive trophoblast antigen (ITA) (synonymous with hyperglycosylated hCG), growth hormone binding protein (GHBP) and placental protein 13 (PP13)); and maternal age. The most frequently evaluated serum markers in combination with ultrasound markers were PAPP-A and free ßhCG.Comparisons of the 10 most frequently evaluated test strategies showed that a combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy significantly outperformed ultrasound markers alone (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). In both direct and indirect comparisons, the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy showed superior diagnostic accuracy to an NT and maternal age test strategy (P < 0.0001). Based on the indirect comparison of all available studies for the two tests, the sensitivity (95% confidence interval) estimated at a 5% FPR for the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy (69 studies; 1,173,853 fetuses including 6010 with Down's syndrome) was 87% (86 to 89) and for the NT and maternal age test strategy (50 studies; 530,874 fetuses including 2701 Down's syndrome pregnancies) was 71% (66 to 75). Combinations of NT with other ultrasound markers, PAPP-A and free ßhCG were evaluated in one or two studies and showed sensitivities of more than 90% and specificities of more than 95%.High-risk populations (defined before screening was done, mainly due to advanced maternal age of 35 years or more, or previous pregnancies affected with Down's syndrome) showed lower detection rates compared to routine screening populations at a 5% FPR. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under-ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting test sensitivity. Conversely, for the NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy, detection rates and false positive rates increased with maternal age in the five studies that provided data separately for the subset of women aged 35 years or more.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Test strategies that combine ultrasound markers with serum markers, especially PAPP-A and free ßhCG, and maternal age were significantly better than those involving only ultrasound markers (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone. They detect about nine out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. Although the absence of nasal bone appeared to have a high diagnostic accuracy, only five out of 10 affected Down's pregnancies were detected at a 1% FPR.

First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 (or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome) rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability. Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.  Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal) and false negative screening tests (i.e. a fetus with Down's syndrome will be missed). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first and second trimester serum markers with and without first trimester ultrasound markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, as combinations of markers.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (the Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), the Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), the National Research Register (Archived 2007), and Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We did forward citation searching in ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We also searched reference lists of retrieved articles SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluating tests of combining first and second trimester maternal serum markers in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, with or without first trimester ultrasound markers, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (reported in 25 publications) involving 228,615 pregnancies (including 1067 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high risk pregnancies. Ten studies made direct comparisons between tests. Thirty-two different test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of eight different tests and maternal age; first trimester nuchal translucency (NT) and the serum markers AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG, Inhibin A, PAPP-A and ADAM 12. We looked at tests combining first and second trimester markers with or without ultrasound as complete tests, and we also examined stepwise and contingent strategies.Meta-analysis of the six most frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a combination of first trimester NT and PAPP-A, and second trimester total hCG, uE3, AFP and Inhibin A significantly outperformed other test combinations that involved only one serum marker or NT in the first trimester, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. However, the evidence was limited in terms of the number of studies evaluating this strategy, and we therefore cannot recommend one single screening strategy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving first trimester ultrasound with first and second trimester serum markers in combination with maternal age are significantly better than those without ultrasound, or those evaluating first trimester ultrasound in combination with second trimester serum markers, without first trimester serum markers. We cannot make recommendations about a specific strategy on the basis of the small number of studies available.

Expanding Use of cfDNA Screening in Pregnancy: Current and Emerging Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues

Purpose of Review

In 2011, screening platforms became available in the US that detect and analyze fragments of cell-free placental DNA (cfDNA) in maternal blood serum. Marketed as noninvasive prenatal tests (NIPT), cfDNA screening is more accurate than previously available serum screening tests for certain aneuploidies. The combination of a noninvasive procedure, high specificity and sensitivity, and lower false positive rates for some aneuploidies (most notably Down's syndrome) has led to broad clinician and patient adoption. New ethical, legal, and social issues arise from the increased use and expanded implementation of cfDNA in pregnancy.

Recent Findings

Recently, several professional associations have amended their guidelines on cfDNA, removing language recommending its use in only "high-risk" pregnancies in favor of making cfDNA screening an available option for women with "low-risk" pregnancies as well. At the same time, commercial cfDNA screening laboratories continue to expand the range of available test panels. As a result, the future of prenatal screening will likely include a broader range of genetic tests in a wider range of patients.

Summary

This article addresses the ethical, legal, and social issues related to the shift in guidance and expanded use of cfDNA in pregnant women, including concerns regarding routinized testing, an unmet and increasing demand for genetic counseling services, social and economic disparities in access, impact on groups living with disabling conditions, and provider liability.

Brief Communication: Maternal Plasma Autoantibodies Screening in Fetal Down Syndrome

Imbalance in the metabolites levels which can potentially be related to certain fetal chromosomal abnormalities can stimulate mother's immune response to produce autoantibodies directed against proteins. The aim of the study was to determine the concentration of 9000 autoantibodies in maternal plasma to detect fetal Down syndrome. Method. We performed 190 amniocenteses and found 10 patients with confirmed fetal Down syndrome (15th–18th weeks of gestation). For the purpose of our control we chose 11 women without confirmed chromosomal aberration. To assess the expression of autoantibodies in the blood plasma, we used a protein microarray, which allows for simultaneous determination of 9000 proteins per sample. Results. We revealed 213 statistically significant autoantibodies, whose expression decreased or increased in the study group with fetal Down syndrome. The second step was to create a classifier of Down syndrome pregnancy, which includes 14 antibodies. The predictive value of the classifier (specificity and sensitivity) is 100%, classification errors, 0%, cross-validation errors, 0%. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that the autoantibodies may play a role in the pathophysiology of Down syndrome pregnancy. Defining their potential as biochemical markers of Down syndrome pregnancy requires further investigation on larger group of patients.

Urine tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21, or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome, rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life. The risk of a Down's syndrome affected pregnancy increases with advancing maternal age.Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing. Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive and false negative screening tests (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first and second trimester urine markers for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 7), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We studied reference lists and published review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of maternal urine in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data as test positive or test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC (receiver operating characteristic) meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. We performed analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 studies involving 18,013 pregnancies (including 527 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Twenty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of the following seven different markers with and without maternal age: AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), ß-core fragment, free ßhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), total hCG, oestriol, gonadotropin peptide and various marker ratios. The strategies evaluated included three double tests and seven single tests in combination with maternal age, and one triple test, two double tests and 11 single tests without maternal age. Twelve of the 19 studies only evaluated the performance of a single test strategy while the remaining seven evaluated at least two test strategies. Two marker combinations were evaluated in more than four studies; second trimester ß-core fragment (six studies), and second trimester ß-core fragment with maternal age (five studies).In direct test comparisons, for a 5% false positive rate (FPR), the diagnostic accuracy of the double marker second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age test combination was significantly better (ratio of diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR): 2.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 4.5), P = 0.02) (summary sensitivity of 73% (CI 57 to 85) at a cut-point of 5% FPR) than that of the single marker test strategy of second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age (summary sensitivity of 56% (CI 45 to 66) at a cut-point of 5% FPR), but was not significantly better (RDOR: 1.5 (0.8 to 2.8), P = 0.21) than that of the second trimester ß-core fragment to oestriol ratio and maternal age test strategy (summary sensitivity of 71% (CI 51 to 86) at a cut-point of 5% FPR).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than the single marker second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age, however, there were few studies. There is a paucity of evidence available to support the use of urine testing for Down's syndrome screening in clinical practice where alternatives are available.

First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing. However, no test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, both as individual markers and as combinations of markers. Accuracy is described by the proportion of fetuses with Down's syndrome detected by screening before birth (sensitivity or detection rate) and the proportion of women with a low risk (normal) screening test result who subsequently had a baby unaffected by Down's syndrome (specificity).

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (Archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did forward citation searching ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We also searched reference lists and published review articles.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies in which all women from a given population had one or more index test(s) compared to a reference standard (either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection). Both consecutive series and diagnostic case-control study designs were included. Randomised trials where individuals were randomised to different screening strategies and all verified using a reference standard were also eligible for inclusion. Studies in which test strategies were compared head-to-head either in the same women, or between randomised groups were identified for inclusion in separate comparisons of test strategies. We excluded studies if they included less than five Down's syndrome cases, or more than 20% of participants were not followed up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data as test positive or test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods or random-effects logistic regression methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy as appropriate. Analyses of studies allowing direct and indirect comparisons between tests were undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 studies (reported in 68 publications) involving 204,759 pregnancies (including 2113 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. We evaluated 78 test combinations formed from combinations of 18 different tests, with or without maternal age; ADAM12 (a disintegrin and metalloprotease), AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), inhibin, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), free βhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), PlGF (placental growth factor), SP1 (Schwangerschafts protein 1), total hCG, progesterone, uE3 (unconjugated oestriol), GHBP (growth hormone binding protein), PGH (placental growth hormone), hyperglycosylated hCG, ProMBP (proform of eosinophil major basic protein), hPL (human placental lactogen), (free αhCG, and free ßhCG to AFP ratio. Direct comparisons between two or more tests were made in 27 studies.Meta-analysis of the nine best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a double marker combination of PAPP-A and free ßhCG significantly outperformed the individual markers (with or without maternal age) detecting about seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). Limited evidence suggested that marker combinations involving PAPP-A may be more sensitive than those without PAPP-A.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving two markers in combination with maternal age, specifically PAPP-A, free βhCG and maternal age are significantly better than those involving single markers with and without age. They detect seven out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. The addition of further markers (triple tests) has not been shown to be statistically superior; the studies included are small with limited power to detect a difference.The screening blood tests themselves have no adverse effects for the woman, over and above the risks of a routine blood test. However some women who have a 'high risk' screening test result, and are given amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) have a risk of miscarrying a baby unaffected by Down's. Parents will need to weigh up this risk when deciding whether or not to have an amniocentesis or CVS following a 'high risk' screening test result.

Maternal plasma and amniotic fluid sphingolipids profiling in fetal Down syndrome

Introduction

Sphingolipids can be potentially involved in the formation of the central and peripheral nervous systems, which are particularly connected with the pathogenesis of Down syndrome. The aim of the study was to determine the concentration of selected sphingolipids in the plasma and amniotic fluid of pregnant patients with fetal Down syndrome.

Material and Methods

Out of 190 amniocentesis we had 10 patients with confirmed Down syndrome. For the purpose of our control we chose 14 women without confirmed chromosomal aberration. To assess the concentration of 11 sphingolipids in the blood plasma and amniotic fluid we used an ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled with triple quadrupole mass spectrometry (UHPLC/MS/MS).

Results

We showed a significant increase in the concentration of 2 ceramides, C22-Cer and C24:1-Cer, in the plasma of women with fetal Down syndrome. Furthermore we showed a decrease in the concentration of 7 ceramides—C16-Cer, C18-Cer, C18:1-Cer, C20-Cer, C22-Cer, C24:1-Cer, and C24-Cer—in the amniotic fluid of women with fetal Down syndrome. We created ROC curves for all significant sphingolipids in maternal plasma, which set the threshold values and allowed for predicting the likelihood of Down syndrome in the fetus with specific sensitivity and specificity. We demonstrated a significantly higher risk of Down syndrome when the plasma concentration of C22-Cer > 12.66 ng/100ul (sens. 0.9, sp. 0.79, P value = 0.0007) and C24:1-Cer > 33,19 ng/100ul (sens. 0.6, sp. 0.86, P value = 0.0194).

Conclusion

On the basis of our findings, it seems that the sphingolipids may play a role in the pathogenesis of Down syndrome. Defining their potential as biochemical markers of Down syndrome requires further investigation on a larger group of patients.

Maternal plasma and amniotic fluid chemokines screening in fetal Down syndrome

Objective. Chemokines exert different inflammatory responses which can potentially be related to certain fetal chromosomal abnormalities. The aim of the study was to determine the concentration of selected chemokines in plasma and amniotic fluid of women with fetal Down syndrome. Method. Out of 171 amniocentesis, we had 7 patients with confirmed fetal Down syndrome (15th–18th weeks of gestation). For the purpose of our control, we chose 14 women without confirmed chromosomal aberration. To assess the concentration of chemokines in the blood plasma and amniotic fluid, we used a protein macroarray, which allows the simultaneous determination of 40 chemokines per sample. Results. We showed significant decrease in the concentration of 4 chemokines, HCC-4, IL-28A, IL-31, and MCP-2, and increase in the concentration of CXCL7 (NAP-2) in plasma of women with fetal Down syndrome. Furthermore, we showed decrease in concentration of 3 chemokines, ITAC, MCP-3, MIF, and increase in concentration of 4 chemokines, IP-10, MPIF-1, CXCL7, and 6Ckine, in amniotic fluid of women with fetal Down syndrome. Conclusion. On the basis of our findings, our hypothesis is that the chemokines may play role in the pathogenesis of Down syndrome. Defining their potential as biochemical markers of Down syndrome requires further investigation on larger group of patients.

Detection of Fetal Aneuploidy Using Cell-Free DNA

Cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) is a highly accurate screening test for major aneuploidies. Despite high detection rates and low false-positive rates compared to current screening methods, cffDNA testing is approved for use in only the high-risk population and is expensive for low-risk women because of a lack of insurance coverage. As the technology improves and research demonstrates the efficacy of cffDNA testing in the general population, insurance coverage of this test likely will be extended to all women. At that time, cffDNA testing in most cases will replace current screening methods. Furthermore, cffDNA testing may become a routine diagnostic test, effectively rendering most invasive diagnostic procedures obsolete.

Imperfect informed consent for prenatal screening: Lessons from the Quad screen

Objective

The study evaluated patient informed consent (IC) for the Quad screen and examined differences in IC between test acceptors and test refusers. A multidimensional model of IC was used.

Methods

Women seeking prenatal care at nine obstetrics clinics in a large Midwestern city completed surveys between February and December 2006. Surveys contained measures for three dimensions of IC: intention, understanding and controlling influence.

Results

56.2% of women did not meet criteria for all three of our dimensions of IC and therefore failed to give it. The failure rate was higher among women who choose to screen (72.6%) than women who choose not screen (50%) (p < 0.001). Women who met all criteria for IC were over three times less likley to choose to screen (or = 0.32, CI 0.17–0.62 ( p < 0.01)) than women who did not meet criteria for IC.

Conclusion

The decision to screen for fetal anomalies is less of a deliberated action than the decision not to screen. Women who lack a fundamental understanding of the purpose and nature of the screen may be operating on the belief that the screen is part of standard care and presents no need to deliberate.

Second trimester serum tests for Down's Syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 - or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome - rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental retardation. Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.  

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of second trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to May 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 18 May 2007), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 18 May 2007), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 18 May 2007), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDION (May 2007), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (May 2007), The National Research Register (May 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (May 2007). We studied reference lists and published review articles.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of maternal serum in women at 14-24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies involving 341,261 pregnancies (including 1,994 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Seventeen studies made direct comparisons between tests. Fifty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 12 different tests and maternal age; alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), total human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (βhCG), free alpha human chorionic gonadotrophin (αhCG), Inhibin A, SP2, CA125, troponin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PGF) and proform of eosinophil major basic protein (ProMBP).Meta-analysis of 12 best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed double and triple tests (involving AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG) significantly outperform individual markers, detecting six to seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. Tests additionally involving inhibin performed best (eight out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies) but were not shown to be significantly better than standard triple tests in direct comparisons. Significantly lower sensitivity occurred in women over the age of 35 years. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting the accuracy of the sensitivity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving two or more markers in combination with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than those involving one marker. The value of combining four or more tests or including inhibin have not been proven to show statistically significant improvement. Further study is required to investigate reduced test performance in women aged over 35 and the impact of differential pregnancy loss on study findings.

Second Trimester Prenatal Screening for Down’s Syndrome in Mainland Chinese Subjects using Double-Marker Analysis of α-fetoprotein and β-human Chorionic Gonadotropin Combined with Measurement of Nuchal Fold Thickness

Introduction: This study examines the effectiveness of double-marker analysis for α-fetoprotein (AFP) and β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) combined with measurement of nuchal fold thickness (NT) in the detection of Down’s syndrome (DS) in Mainland Chinese subjects during second trimester prenatal screening. Materials and Methods: We examined pregnant women with a singleton pregnancy between 15 and 21 weeks of gestation who underwent second trimester screening for DS using double-marker analysis for AFP and β-hCG combined with ultrasound measurement of NT. The combined risk of DS was calculated. A cut-off of 1/270 was used to defi ne a pregnancy at high-risk of DS. Amniocentesis was offered to all patients with high-risk pregnancies. Results: Using double-marker analysis for AFP and β-hCG in combination with measurement of NT, the detection rate of DS increased from 66.7% to 77.8% when compared with double-marker analysis alone with similar false-positive rates (4.35%, 4.83% respectively). Using receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis, we determined that the double-marker analysis combined with measurement of NT exhibited an increased area under the curve (AUC) of 0.835 (95% CI: 0.743 to 0.927) when compared to double-marker analysis alone, which had an AUC of 0.748 (95% CI: 0.635 to 0.860). In addition, both methods were more effective than any other single test such as AFP, free β-hCG or NT measurement. Conclusion: Second trimester prenatal screening using double-marker analysis for AFP and β-hCG combined with measurement of NT is effective for the detection of DS in Mainland Chinese pregnancies. Key words: Down’s syndrome, Prenatal screening, Second trimester

The relationship between utilization of prenatal care and Down syndrome live births

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated whether utilization of prenatal care, as measured by the Kessner index, affects the number of Down syndrome live births.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of birth certificate data of Down syndrome live births comparing 1989 to 2001 by year, maternal age, gestational age at first prenatal visit, and adequacy of prenatal care according to Kessner categories of adequacy of prenatal care.

RESULTS

Down syndrome live births were inversely correlated with adequacy of prenatal care. Reductions in Down syndrome live births were seen in all categories of prenatal care in all age groups. In 2001 a minimum 30% reduction was seen in any category rising to a 58% reduction in women > or =35 years with adequate prenatal care. The largest reductions were seen in women > or =35 years of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in Down syndrome live births occurred in all age groups between 1989 and 2001. Utilization of prenatal care as measured by the Kessner index was associated with reductions in Down syndrome live births, with a greater reduction in women > or =35 years of age.

Preliminary estimate for the second-trimester maternal serum screening detection rate of the 45,X karyotype using α-fetoprotein, unconjugated estriol and human chorionic gonadotropin

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the detection rate for 45,X pregnancies through second-trimester screening using maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin and unconjugated estriol.

METHODS

Twenty-two cases of 45,X were ascertained through a cytogenetics database and an additional 51 cases were identified through publications. Serum analyte concentrations were reviewed for cases with fetal hydrops, cystic hygroma alone, and no evidence of edema. Using the statistical characteristics of this sample of affected pregnancies, computer simulations were carried out to determine the proportion of 45,X pregnancies that should be screen-positive for Down syndrome and trisomy 18. The extent to which additional cases of 45,X might be identified using a protocol specifically designed to detect 45,X pregnancies was also estimated.

RESULTS

Approximately 54% of all 45,X pregnancies should be identifiable through screening for Down syndrome and trisomy 18. The detection rate for cases with hydrops and/or cystic hygroma was 60%, and without edema 33%. If offered with screening for Down syndrome and trisomy 18, 45,X screening could identify approximately 7% more of the affected pregnancies with an incremental rise of 0.2% in the false-positive rate.

CONCLUSIONS

A screening algorithm for 45,X could be developed. However, the number of additional affected pregnancies identified would appear to be too small to justify this screening.

Comparison of First and Second Trimester Aneuploidy Risk Assessment

Counseling regarding the options for aneuploidy risk assessment is complicated and requires thorough counseling with the patient. Second trimester serum risk assessment has been the gold standard because of widespread availability, low cost, and vast experience with counseling and performance. First trimester risk assessment is becoming more widely available and provides increased sensitivity for Down syndrome detection with a detection rate of approximately 87% (95% confidence interval: 84.0% to 89.4%), at a fixed false-positive rate of 5%. With the advent of first trimester techniques, controversy has arisen as there are advocates for the different recently available approaches. In this chapter, we outline the various options in a manner that will provide practical information for physicians offering such testing. Clearly, implementation of first trimester risk assessment requires special training and meticulous quality control standards for nuchal translucency and laboratory measurements, access to chorionic villus sampling, and also appropriate counseling regarding risk assessment options.

The best marker combination using the integrated screening test approach for detecting various chromosomal aneuploidies

AIMS

To evaluate the cross-trimester multiple marker correlation and the minimum marker combination needed for detecting various chromosomal aneuploidies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Parturient women with singleton pregnancies who underwent non-interventional sequential screening test and followed prospectively were recruited. They all underwent first trimester combined nuchal translucency (NT), pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A), and free beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (f-betahCG), followed by second trimester measurement of unconjugated estriol (uE3), human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). Pearson correlation was applied to compute any cross-trimester marker correlation and logistic regression analysis was used to determine the minimum marker combination for detecting various categories of chromosomal aneuploidies.

RESULTS

The current study included 552 normal and 43 chromosomal-affected pregnancies (24 Down's syndrome [DS], 7 Turner's syndrome, 8 Edward's syndrome, 4 Klinefelter syndrome and 5 triploidy) for which the results of both the screening tests and the pregnancy outcome were available. In the normal cases, a significant correlation was found between f-betahCG and hCG (r=0.52), as well as between PAPP-A and uE3 (r=0.174). In DS pregnancies, the NT correlated with both hCG (r=0.45) and uE3 (r=-0.39). In Turner's syndrome, uE3 correlated both with PAPP-A (r=0.97) and f-betahCG (r=0.97). No other significant correlations were found. Furthermore, with the exception of f-betahCG and hCG in the unaffected cases, all other markers correlation appeared very weak. For detecting all the above categories of aneuploidies, the combination of NT, PAPP-A and uE3 and the maternal age background risk were found adequate, with a 74% detection rate (DR) for a 5% false positive rate (FPR). For DS only, the combination of maternal age-related background risk and the combination of NT, PAPP-A, hCG and AFP yielded a 79% DR for a 5% FPR.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study agrees with a previous report that, overall, there is no strong correlation between first and second trimester markers. The extension of the integrated test for detecting various categories of common chromosomal aneuploidies using NT, PAPP-A and uE3 deserves further evaluation.

Trends in the use of second trimester maternal serum screening from 1991 to 2003

PURPOSE

To identify trends in the utilization of second trimester maternal serum screening, follow-up amniocenteses, and the detection of Down syndrome-affected pregnancies between 1991 and 2003.

METHODS

We reviewed all triple and quadruple maternal serum screening tests referred to the University of Connecticut screening laboratory from women with singleton pregnancies. For each calendar year, the total number of tests, proportion to women aged 35 or older, number of follow-up amniocenteses, and the number of prenatally and postnatally diagnosed Down syndrome cases were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 109,469 women received screening. In 1991, the proportion of older women who received screening was 58% of that present in the Connecticut population but by 2003 this had increased to 83% (P < 0.001). In Down syndrome screen-positive pregnancies, there was no significant change in the rate of amniocentesis utilization (average 73%), but in false-positives, there was a decline from 70% in 1991 to 27% in 2003 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Increased use of maternal serum screening by older women, use of second trimester ultrasound, and improvements in screening methodology have resulted in sharply reduced numbers of amniocenteses in unaffected pregnancies.

Placenta growth factor levels in second-trimester maternal serum in Down syndrome pregnancy and in the prediction of preeclampsia

OBJECTIVES

To determine the levels of placenta growth factor (PlGF) in second-trimester maternal serum samples from pregnancies affected with fetal Down syndrome and from those that developed preeclampsia and to assess the utility of PlGF as a screening tool for these conditions.

METHODS

Residual second-trimester maternal serum samples were retrieved from freezer storage for 39 cases of Down syndrome and 44 pregnancies that later developed preeclampsia. Each case was matched to 5 control samples for gestational age at collection and duration of freezer storage. PlGF levels were measured in each sample by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

RESULTS

PlGF levels increased with gestational age between 15 and 20 gestational weeks. After adjusting for gestational-age effects, the median level of PlGF was 1.01 MoM in Down syndrome pregnancy and 0.74 MoM in pregnancies that developed preeclampsia, which were not significantly different from matched controls. The duration between sampling and onset of preeclampsia did not have an effect on the PlGF level.

CONCLUSION

PlGF levels are not significantly altered in second-trimester maternal serum samples from cases of Down syndrome or in pregnancies that develop preeclampsia.

Biochemical screening for congenital defects

This article discusses biochemical screening for congenital defects. Biochemical screening remains the standard for estimating the risk of aneuploidy in pregnancy. The combination of first and second trimester markers promises to further improve diagnostic accuracy for anomaly detection.

Changes in the Utilization of Prenatal Diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

The impact of prenatal screening for Down syndrome has largely been assessed under the assumption that screening protocols and policies are fully used. To measure the overall effectiveness in actual clinical practice, we analyzed the tests performed by a single cytogenetics laboratory.

METHODS

We reviewed all amniotic fluid and chorionic villus samples (CVS) processed by the University of Connecticut Health Center's cytogenetics laboratory for the years 1991 to 2002. We evaluated trends in the use of prenatal testing, referral indications, and the numbers of cytogenetic abnormalities identified.

RESULTS

The number of women receiving amniocentesis or CVS declined more than 50% from 1,988 in 1991 to 933 in 2002 (P <.001), despite an increase in the number of women of advanced maternal age in the population served. There was a 68% decline in the number of women who underwent invasive prenatal testing solely on the basis of their age (1,314 in 1991 to 423 in 2002, P <.001). The number of Down syndrome fetuses detected prenatally increased from 20 to 31 (P =.08), representing approximately one half of the affected pregnancies present in the population served. Between 1991 and 2002, the proportion of antenatal cytogenetic tests with a significant chromosomal abnormality increased from 1 in 43 (2.3%) to 1 in 14 (7.0%; P <.001).

CONCLUSION

Advances in maternal serum screening and second-trimester ultrasonography have resulted in more judicious use of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II-2

Antenatal Down syndrome screening in the United States in 2001: a survey of maternal-fetal medicine specialists

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to determine patterns of antenatal Down syndrome screening and risk adjustment by maternal-fetal medicine specialists in the United States in 2001.

STUDY DESIGN

A survey to investigate Down syndrome screening practice patterns was mailed to the 1,638 members of the Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine in the United States. Practice demographics, screening patterns, and the numeric risks quoted in counseling were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-three specialists (33.2%) responded; 530 of these specialists (97.6%) performed antenatal Down syndrome screening; all of them offered second-trimester screening, and 247 of them (45.5%) offered first-trimester screening. With the use of second-trimester ultrasonography, risk was increased by 69.4% of respondents and decreased by 33.1%. Amniocentesis was the most frequently used diagnostic test (83.2%), with loss rates quoted at 1:100 to 1:1,000.

CONCLUSION

Maternal-fetal medicine specialists show a wide in variation practices used for Down syndrome screening, modification of risk, and quoted procedure-related loss rates. This information calls for a consensus regarding risks that are quoted in Down syndrome counseling.

Advances in prenatal screening for Down syndrome: I. general principles and second trimester testing

BACKGROUND

Down syndrome is one of the most important causes of mental retardation in the population. In the absence of prenatal screening and diagnosis, prevalence at birth in the United States would currently exceed 1:600. The purpose of prenatal screening is to identify those women at the increased risk for an affected pregnancy and to maximize the options available to these women.

TESTS AVAILABLE

Second trimester serum screening involves combining the maternal age-specific risk for an affected pregnancy with the risks associated with the concentrations of maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP), unconjugated estriol (uE3), and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) (triple testing). A forth analyte, inhibin-A (INH-A), is increasingly being utilized (quadruple testing). Optimal second trimester screening requires the integration of a number of clinical variables, the most important of which is an accurate assessment of gestational age. In addition to Down syndrome, the triple and quadruple tests preferentially identify fetal trisomy 18, Turner syndrome, triploidy, trisomy 16 mosaicism, fetal death, Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome, and steroid sulfatase deficiency. Some programs modify the Down syndrome risks generated through maternal serum screening tests with fetal biometric data obtained by ultrasound. Other second trimester tests have shown promise, including the analysis of maternal urine and fetal cells in the maternal circulation, but none are in routine clinical use.

CONCLUSION

The second trimester triple and quadruple tests provide benchmarks for evaluating new screening protocols. The combination of fetal biometry, new test development as well as clarification of the role of co-factors that affect the concentrations of analytes in existing tests should lead to greater efficacy in second trimester screening for Down syndrome.

Developments in laboratory techniques for prenatal diagnosis

Ongoing trends in prenatal diagnosis aim at early, rapid, and ideally noninvasive diagnosis as well as at the improvement of risk-screening for aneuploidy. Interphase-fluorescence in situ hybridization and quantitative fluorescence polymerase chain reaction are efficient tools for the rapid exclusion of selected aneuploidies in addition to the established direct preparation of chromosomes from chorionic villi. Interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization has also made possible the diagnosis of selected chromosome abnormalities in single cells (e.g. in preimplantation genetic diagnosis) or noninvasive diagnosis. More complex multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization approaches are currently being evaluated. Single cell polymerase chain reaction is the key technique for the molecular diagnosis of a growing number of monogenic conditions before implantation or, still more experimental, in fetal cells retrieved from the maternal circulation. New sources for noninvasive diagnosis came into play such as fetal DNA or cell nuclei in maternal plasma. The combination of biochemical parameters in the maternal serum, namely free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin with pregnancy associated plasma protein A and sonographic markers, has already dramatically increased the sensitivity of risk screening in the first trimester of pregnancy.