Clinical application of noninvasive prenatal testing in the detection of fetal chromosomal diseases

Objective

To assess the detection efficiency of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal autosomal aneuploidy, sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA), other chromosome aneuploidy, copy number variation (CNV), and to provide further data for clinical application of NIPT.

Materials and methods

25,517 pregnant women who underwent NIPT testing in Anhui Province Maternity and Child Health Hospital from September 2019 to September 2020 were selected, and samples with high-risk test results were subjected to karyotype analysis for comparison by using amniotic fluid, with some samples subjected to further validation by chromosomal microarray analysis, and followed up for pregnancy outcome.

Results

A total of 25,517 pregnant women who received NIPT, 25,502 cases were tested successfully, and 294 high-risk samples (1.15%) were detected, there were 96 true positive samples, 117 false positive samples and 81 cases were refused further diagnosis. Samples with high risk of autosomal aneuploidy were detected in 71 cases (0.28%), and 51 cases were confirmed, including: trisomy 21 (T21) in 44 cases, trisomy 18 (T18) in 5 cases, and trisomy 13 (T13) in 2 cases; the positive predictive value (PPV) was 91.67%, 45.45%, and 33.33%, respectively, and the negative predictive value was 100%, the false positive rate (FPR) was 0.02%, 0.02%, and 0.02%, respectively.13 samples with high risk of mosaic trisomies 21, 18, and 13 were detected, and 1 case of T21mos was confirmed with a PPV of 8.33%. Samples with high risk of SCA were detected in 72 cases (0.28%), and the diagnosis was confirmed in 23 cases, with a PPV of 41.07% and a FPR of 0.13%. These included 3 cases of 45,X, 6 cases of 47,XXY, 8 cases of 47,XXX and 6 cases of 47,XYY, with PPVs of 12.00%, 50.00%, 72.73%, and 75.00%, respectively, and false-positive rates of 0.09%, 0.02%, 0.01% and 0.01% respectively. Samples with high risk of CNV were detected in 104 cases (0.41%) and confirmed in 18 cases, with a PPV of 32.14% and a FPR of 0.15%. Samples with high risk of other chromosomal aneuploidy were detected in 34 cases (0.13%), and the diagnosis was confirmed in 3 cases, which were T2, T9, and T16 respectively. The overall PPV for other chromosome aneuploidy was 12.50%, with a FPR of 0.08%.

Conclusion

NIPT is indicated for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 screening, especially for T21. It also has some certain reference value for SCA and CNV, but is not recommended for screening of other chromosomal aneuploidy.

The origins of aneuploidy research consortium

The presence of high levels of aneuploidy in oocytes and early embryos and their fate is of considerable scientific and clinical importance. The Origins of Aneuploidy Research Consortium (OARC) was established to promote interdisciplinary communication and collaborative research into this topic. Under the umbrella of OARC, a series of papers has now been published in this Special Issue of Prenatal Diagnosis. Recent studies have transformed the view that aneuploidy is usually attributable to meiotic non-disjunction. The molecular basis for the association between meiotic error and maternal age is becoming understood. The clinical significance of mitotic instability in the earliest cells divisions of the embryo is also becoming clearer. An error in the segregation of one or more whole chromosomes from a parent does not invariably result in a non-viable pregnancy or an abnormal outcome. Epidemiologic data allows an assessment of in utero viability, the effect of maternal age, and secondary factors that may affect aneuploidy prevalence. We advocate careful use of nomenclature and revision of educational materials to more accurately explain the complex and often nuanced mechanisms. OARC plans to hold additional workshops, promote additional publications and offer educational resources.

Low fetal fraction of cell-free DNA predicts placental dysfunction and hypertensive disease in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of low fetal fraction of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) with placental compromise and adverse perinatal outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort utilizing a sample of convenience including 639 women undergoing cfDNA screening at our institution from January 2013 to January 2017. Low fetal fraction was defined as less than the 25th percentile. Indicators of placental compromise were examined individually and as a composite outcome, including hypertensive disease of pregnancy, intrauterine growth restriction, abruption, and oligohydramnios. Neonatal outcomes, including preterm delivery, low Apgar scores, and small for gestational age, also were examined. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Low fetal fraction was associated with placental compromise (RR 1.6 [CI 1.1-2.2]), hypertensive disease of pregnancy (RR 1.6 [CI 1.003-2.6]), and preeclampsia with severe features (RR 3.3 [CI 1.2-8.9]). Low fetal faction was not associated with preterm delivery, low Apgar scores, or small for gestational age.

CONCLUSIONS

Low fetal fraction of cfDNA among asymptomatic women may serve as a predictor of subsequent placental dysfunction and hypertensive disease.

Fetal and neonatal neurogenetics

Disorders of the developing nervous system may be of genetic origin, comprising congenital malformations of spine and brain as well as metabolic or vascular disorders that affect normal brain development. Acquired causes include congenital infections, hypoxic-ischemic or traumatic brain injury, and a number of rare neoplasms. This chapter focuses on the clinical presentation and workup of neurogenetic disorders presenting in the fetal or neonatal period. After a summary of the most frequent clinical presentations, clues from history taking and clinical examination are illustrated with short case reports. This is followed by a discussion of the different tools available for the workup of neurogenetic disorders, including the various genetic techniques with their advantages and disadvantages. The implications of a molecular genetic diagnosis for the patient and family are addressed in the section on counseling. The chapter concludes with a proposed workflow that may help the clinician when confronted with a potential neurogenetic disorder in the fetal or neonatal period.

Trisomy 21 screening based on first and second trimester in a Taiwanese population

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the performance of first- and second-trimester screening tests for detecting fetal trisomy 21 in a Taiwanese population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter study 29,137 cases enrolled the chromosomal abnormality screening between 2013 and 2014 two years period from Taipei city. There were 23,990 was done the first trimester screening using a combination of fetal nuchal translucency, maternal serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin, and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A between 11⁺⁰ and 13⁺⁶ weeks of gestation age. Second-trimester screening was done for 5149 cases using a double test (β-human chorionic gonadotropin and serum alpha fetoprotein) between 15 and 20 weeks of gestation. The cut-off risk for both is 1:270 or higher.

RESULTS

This multicenter study 29,137 cases that completed first- and second-trimester screening, and the outcome was available in 28,726 cases. The mean maternal age of the screen-positive group was 34.6 ± 4.2 years. The first-trimester had 891 cases screening positive with a detection rate of 97.5% for fetal trisomy 21, and false positive rate of 3.5%. In the second-trimester had 334 cases screening positive, the detection rate and false positive rate were 33.3% and 6.4% for trisomy 21, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The first-trimester screening had higher performance with a lower false positive rate than the second-trimester screening. First-trimester screening could reduce the rate of unnecessary invasive testing for all pregnant women.

Improving women's knowledge about prenatal screening in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome - development and acceptability of a low literacy decision aid

Background

Access to information about prenatal screening is important particularly in light of new techniques such as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). This study aimed to develop and examine the acceptability of a low literacy decision aid (DA) about Down syndrome screening among pregnant women with varying education levels and GPs.

Methods

We developed a DA booklet providing information about first-trimester combined testing, maternal serum screening, and NIPT. GPs and women participated in a telephone interview to examine the acceptability of the DA and measure screening knowledge before and after reading the DA. The knowledge measure was designed to assess whether women had understood the gist of the information presented in the decision aid. It comprised conceptual questions (e.g. screening tells you the chance of having a baby with Down syndrome) and numeric questions (e.g. the accuracy of different screening tests).

Results

Twenty-nine women and 18 GPs participated. Regardless of education level, most women found the booklet ‘very’ clearly presented (n = 22, 76%), and ‘very’ informative (n = 23, 80%). Overall, women’s conceptual and numeric knowledge improved after exposure to the DA, from 4% having adequate knowledge to 69%. Women’s knowledge of NIPT also improved after receiving the decision aid, irrespective of education. Most GPs found it ‘very’ clearly presented (n = 13, 72%), and that it would ‘very much’ facilitate decision-making (n = 16, 89%).

Conclusions

The DA was found to be acceptable to women as well as GPs. A comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy of the decision aid compared to standard information is an important next step. Strategies are needed on how to implement the tool in practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2135-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Single Nucleotide Polymorphism-Based Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: Experience in India

INTRODUCTION

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has revolutionized prenatal screening for chromosomal aneuploidies in some countries. Its implementation has been sporadic in developing countries. Given the genetic variation of the people in different countries, we evaluated the performance of the SNP-based NIPT in India .

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Panorama™ NIPT was performed in 516 pregnancies, which had tested intermediate-to-high risk on conventional first and second trimester screening. Results were confirmed either by invasive diagnostic testing or by clinical evaluation after birth.

RESULTS

Of 511 samples analyzed, results were obtained in 499 (97.7%). Of these, 480 (98.2%) were low risk and 19 were high risk. A sensitivity of 100% was obtained for detection of trisomies 21, 18, 13 and sex chromosomal abnormalities. The specificity ranged from 99.3 to 100% for abnormalities tested. Taken together, the positive predictive value for trisomies 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X was 85.7%. The average fetal fraction was 8.2%, which is lower than the average observed elsewhere.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of detailed experience with NIPT in India and demonstrates comparable performance in all aspects of testing to the results elsewhere.

Cost-effectiveness of cell-free DNA in maternal blood testing for prenatal detection of trisomy 21, 18 and 13: a systematic review

The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of the analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood, often called the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT), in the prenatal screening of trisomy in chromosomes 21, 18 and 13. MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched in April 2017. We selected: (1) economic evaluations that estimated the costs and detected cases of trisomy 21, 18 or 13; (2) comparisons of prenatal screening with NIPT (universal or contingent strategies) and the usual screening without NIPT, (3) in pregnant women with any risk of foetal anomalies. Studies were reviewed by two researchers. Data were extracted, the methodological quality was assessed and a narrative synthesis was prepared. In total, 12 studies were included, four of them performed in Europe. Three studies evaluated NIPT as a contingent test, three studies evaluated a universal NIPT, and six studies evaluated both. The results are heterogeneous, especially for the contingent NIPT where the results range from NIPT being dominant to a dominated strategy. Universal NIPT was found to be more effective but also costlier than the usual screening, with very high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. One advantage of screening with NIPT is lower invasive procedure-related foetal losses than with usual screening. In conclusion, the cost-effectiveness of contingent NIPT is uncertain according to several studies, while the universal NIPT is not cost-effective currently.

Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women

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.

Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a national healthcare system: global challenges and national solutions

Background

Since the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in 2011, mainly by commercial companies, a growing demand for NIPT from the public and healthcare professionals has been putting pressure on the healthcare systems of various countries. This study identifies the challenges of establishing a responsible implementation of NIPT for aneuploidy in prenatal healthcare, by looking at the Netherlands.

Methods

A mixed methods approach involving 13 stakeholder interviews, document analysis and (participatory) observations of the Dutch NIPT Consortium meetings were used. The Diffusion of Innovation Theory and a Network of Actors model were used to interpret the findings.

Results

Implementation of NIPT was facilitated by several factors. The set-up of a national NIPT Consortium enabled discussion and collaboration between stakeholders. Moreover, it led to the plan to offer NIPT through a nationwide research setting (TRIDENT studies), which created a learning phase for careful implementation. The Dutch legal context was perceived as a delaying factor, but eventually gave room for the parties involved to organise themselves and their practices.

Conclusions

This study shows that implementing advanced technologies with profound effects on prenatal care benefit from a learning phase that allows time to carefully evaluate the technical performance and women’s experiences and to enable public debate. Such a coordinated learning phase, involving all stakeholders, will stimulate the process of responsible and sustainable implementation.

Canadian women's attitudes toward noninvasive prenatal testing of fetal DNA in maternal plasma (.)

OBJECTIVE

To determine the perceptions and attitudes of Canadian women to Noninvasive Prenatal Testing of fetal DNA.

STUDY DESIGN

A designed questionnaire was administered to women attending the outpatient antenatal clinic at a tertiary urban hospital. Attitudes to current and new prenatal screening modalities were assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Bowker's test of symmetry was used to compare individual responses regarding the two screening modalities. Changes in women's responses pre- and post-delivery were also compared.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-nine women were enrolled in this study. 88% of women state that they would perform prenatal screening via fetal DNA in the maternal plasma if available. When compared to conventional screening, significantly less women believe that the NIPT should be available upon request for non-medical traits (36.4% versus 60.4%, p < 0.001). When compared to their answer before delivery, more women agreed that screening with fetal DNA in maternal plasma could be used in a negative way to select for desired non-medical traits such as gender.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of fetal DNA in the maternal plasma is widely accepted in our Canadian population as a future method of noninvasive prenatal screening despite recognition of certain ethical concerns. This information can be used when implementing new genetic screening programs.

Non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal chromosome abnormalities: review of clinical and ethical issues

Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA (cfDNA screening) was proposed to reduce the number of invasive procedures in current prenatal diagnosis for fetal aneuploidies. We review here the clinical and ethical issues of cfDNA screening. To date, it is not clear how cfDNA screening is going to impact the performances of clinical prenatal diagnosis and how it could be incorporated in real life. The direct marketing to users may have facilitated the early introduction of cfDNA screening into clinical practice despite limited evidence-based independent research data supporting this rapid shift. There is a need to address the most important ethical, legal, and social issues before its implementation in a mass setting. Its introduction might worsen current tendencies to neglect the reproductive autonomy of pregnant women.

Pre- and post-test genetic counseling for chromosomal and Mendelian disorders

Genetic carrier screening, prenatal screening for aneuploidy, and prenatal diagnostic testing have expanded dramatically over the past 2 decades. Driven in part by powerful market forces, new complex testing modalities have become available after limited clinical research. The responsibility for offering these tests lies primarily on the obstetrical care provider and has become more burdensome as the number of testing options expands. Genetic testing in pregnancy is optional, and decisions about undergoing tests, as well as follow-up testing, should be informed and based on individual patients' values and needs. Careful pre- and post-test counseling is central to supporting informed decision-making. This article explores three areas of technical expansion in genetic testing: expanded carrier screening, non-invasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies using cell-free DNA, and diagnostic testing using fetal chromosomal microarray testing, and provides insights aimed at enabling the obstetrical practitioner to better support patients considering these tests.

Development and validation of a measure of informed choice for women undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using cell-free DNA for aneuploidy is a highly accurate screening test; however, concerns exist around the potential for routinisation of testing. The multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) is a quantitative instrument developed to assess informed choice for Down syndrome screening (DSS). We have validated a modified MMIC for NIPT and measured informed choice among women offered NIPT in a public health service. The measure was distributed to women recruited across eight maternity units in the United Kingdom who had accepted DSS. Construct validity was assessed by simultaneously conducting qualitative interviews. Five hundred and eighty-five questionnaires were completed and 45 interviews conducted after blood-draw (or equivalent for those that declined NIPT). The measure demonstrated good internal consistency and internal validity. Results indicate the vast majority of women (89%) made an informed choice; 95% were judged to have good knowledge, 88% had a positive attitude and 92% had deliberated. Of the 11% judged to have made an uninformed choice, 55% had not deliberated, 41% had insufficient knowledge, and 19% had a negative attitude. Ethnicity (OR=2.78, P=0.003) and accepting NIPT (OR=16.05, P=0.021) were found to be significant predictors of informed choice. The high rate of informed choice is likely to reflect the importance placed on the provision of pre-test counselling in this study. It will be vital to ensure that this is maintained once NIPT is offered in routine clinical practice.

Noninvasive Prenatal Screening for Genetic Diseases Using Massively Parallel Sequencing of Maternal Plasma DNA

The identification of cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal plasma in 1997 heralded the most significant change in obstetric care for decades, with the advent of safer screening and diagnosis based on analysis of maternal blood. Here, we describe how the technological advances offered by next-generation sequencing have allowed for the development of a highly sensitive screening test for aneuploidies as well as definitive prenatal molecular diagnosis for some monogenic disorders.

Current approaches on non-invasive prenatal diagnosis: Prenatal genomics, transcriptomics, personalized fetal diagnosis

Recent developments in molecular genetics improved our knowledge on fetal genome and physiology. Novel scientific innovations in prenatal diagnosis have accelerated in the last decade changing our vision immensely. Data obtained from fetal genomic studies brought new insights to fetal medicine and by the advances in fetal DNA and RNA sequencing technology novel treatment strategies has evolved. Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis found ground in genetics and the results are widely studied in scientific arena. When Lo and colleges proved fetal genetic material can be extracted from maternal plasma and fetal DNA can be isolated from maternal serum, the gate to many exciting discoveries was open. Microarray technology and advances in sequencing helped fetal diagnosis as well as other areas of medicine. Today it is a very crucial prerequisite for physicians practicing prenatal diagnosis to have a profound knowledge in genetics. Prevailing practical use and application of fetal genomic tests in maternal and fetal medicine mandates obstetricians to update their knowledge in genetics. The purpose of this review is to assist physicians to understand and update their knowledge in fetal genetic testing from maternal blood, individualized prenatal counseling and advancements on the subject by sharing our experiences as İstanbul University Fetal Nucleic Acid Research Group.

Identification of trisomy 18, trisomy 13, and Down syndrome from maternal plasma

Current prenatal diagnosis for fetal aneuploidies (including trisomy 21 [T21]) generally relies on an initial biochemical serum-based noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) after which women who are deemed to be at high risk are offered an invasive confirmatory test (amniocentesis or chorionic villi sampling for a fetal karyotype), which is associated with a risk of fetal miscarriage. Recently, genomics-based NIPT (gNIPT) was proposed for the analysis of fetal genomic DNA circulating in maternal blood. The diffusion of this technology in routine prenatal care could be a major breakthrough in prenatal diagnosis, since initial research studies suggest that this novel approach could be very effective and could reduce substantially the number of invasive procedures. However, the limitations of gNIPT may be underappreciated. In this review, we examine currently published literature on gNIPT to highlight advantages and limitations. At this time, the performance of gNIPT is relatively well-documented only in high-risk pregnancies for T21 and trisomy 18. This additional screening test may be an option for women classified as high-risk of aneuploidy who wish to avoid invasive diagnostic tests, but it is crucial that providers carefully counsel patients about the test's advantages and limitations. The gNIPT is currently not recommended as a first-tier prenatal screening test for T21. Since gNIPT is not considered as a diagnostic test, a positive gNIPT result should always be confirmed by an invasive test, such as amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling. Validation studies are needed to optimally introduce this technology into the existing routine workflow of prenatal care.

It's More Than a Blood Test: Patients' Perspectives on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) offers pregnant women a new risk assessment tool for fetal aneuploidy that is superior to conventional screening tests. We conducted focus groups with women who were currently pregnant or had recently delivered in the past year to characterize their perspectives about NIPT and to explore factors they would consider during decision making about its use. Women identified accuracy, early timing, testing ease, and determination of fetal sex as advantages of NIPT over other screens, and the noninvasive method of NIPT as an advantage over diagnostic tests. False positive and false negative results, anxiety, cost and insurance coverage were seen as disadvantages of NIPT. Women who do not want fetal aneuploidy information most likely will not undergo NIPT, despite its advantages over other screening tests. However, given its advantages, the decision to have NIPT is straightforward for women who want genetic information about the fetus. Women emphasized the need to make autonomous, private, and informed choices about NIPT, as they would with any prenatal genetic testing option. These perspectives may guide clinicians to conduct effective and clinically relevant counseling with pregnant women who consider utilizing this new genetic technology.

Are midwifery clients in Ontario making informed choices about prenatal screening?

BACKGROUND

Informed choice is often lacking in women's decisions about prenatal screening.

AIM

The aim of this study is to evaluate how well midwives in Ontario, Canada are facilitating informed choice in this area.

METHODS

An Internet-based survey was used to investigate 171 midwifery clients' knowledge, attitude towards and experience of prenatal genetic screening tests, and to determine the proportion of study participants who made an informed choice about prenatal screening.

FINDINGS

All participants demonstrated adequate knowledge of prenatal screening. The vast majority (93.0%) of participants made an informed choice. Participants who chose to screen had lower knowledge scores than those who opted out of screening. Client satisfaction rates in regard to care received in this area ranged from 97% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study suggest that Ontario midwives are effective in conveying information on prenatal genetic screening, contributing to high levels of client knowledge and satisfaction in comparison to similar studies in other jurisdictions.

Eliminating first trimester markers: will replacing PAPP-A and βhCG miss women at risk for small for gestational age?

OBJECTIVE

Placental analytes are traditionally used for aneuploidy screening, although may be replaced by cell-free fetal DNA. Abnormal analytes also identify women at risk for small for gestational age (SGA). We sought to quantify the proportion of women at risk for SGA by low pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) or βhCG who would not otherwise be identified by maternal risk factors.

METHODS

We studied first-trimester PAPPA-A and βhCG from 658 euploid singleton pregnancies from a prospective longitudinal cohort. Analytes were standardized for gestational age in multiples of the median (MoM). SGA was defined as birthweight z-score ≤-1.28. Maternal risk factors included chronic hypertension, pre-gestational diabetes and age ≥40.

RESULTS

Mean GA was 38.8 ± 1.9 weeks; 6.8% had a SGA infant. Low PAPP-A and βhCG were identified in 48 (7.4%) and 9 (1.4%) of pregnancies, respectively, of whom 18.9% were SGA (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.3). 88% did not have risk factors for SGA. Among women with no risk factors, low PAPP-A was a significant predictor of SGA (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.4).

CONCLUSION

Most women with abnormal analytes did not have risk factors for SGA. Eliminating PAPP-A and βhCG may present missed opportunities to identify women at risk for SGA.

Motivations for undertaking DNA sequencing-based non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: a qualitative study with early adopter patients in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

A newly introduced cell-free fetal DNA sequencing based non-invasive prenatal testing (DNA-NIPT) detects Down syndrome with sensitivity of 99% at early gestational stage without risk of miscarriage. Attention has been given to its public health implications; little is known from consumer perspectives. This qualitative study aimed to explore women's motivations for using, and perceptions of, DNA-NIPT in Hong Kong.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In-depth interviews were conducted with 45 women who had undertaken DNA-NIPT recruited by purposive sampling based on socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. The sample included 31 women identified as high-risk from serum and ultrasound based Down syndrome screening (SU-DSS). Thematic narrative analysis examined informed-decision making of the test and identified the benefits and needs. Women outlined a number of reasons for accessing DNA-NIPT: reducing the uncertainty associated with risk probability-based results from SU-DSS, undertaking DNA-NIPT as a comprehensive measure to counteract risk from childbearing especially at advanced age, perceived predictive accuracy and absence of risk of harm to fetus. Accounts of women deemed high-risk or not high-risk are distinctive in a number of respects. High-risk women accessed DNA-NIPT to get a clearer idea of their risk. This group perceived SU-DSS as an unnecessary and confusing procedure because of its varying, protocol-dependent detection rates. Those women not deemed high-risk, in contrast, undertook DNA-NIPT for psychological assurance and to reduce anxiety even after receiving the negative result from SU-DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

DNA-NIPT was regarded positively by women who chose this method of screening over the routine, less expensive testing options. Given its perceived utility, health providers need to consider whether DNA-NIPT should be offered as part of universal routine care to women at high-risk for fetal aneuploidy. If this is the case, then further development of guidelines and quality assurance will be needed to provide a service suited to patients' needs.

Noninvasive prenatal testing: limitations and unanswered questions

The clinical use of noninvasive prenatal testing to screen high-risk patients for fetal aneuploidy is becoming increasingly common. Initial studies have demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity, and there is hope that these tests will result in a reduction of invasive diagnostic procedures as well as their associated risks. Guidelines on the use of this testing in clinical practice have been published; however, data on actual test performance in a clinical setting are lacking, and there are no guidelines on quality control and assurance. The different noninvasive prenatal tests employ complex methodologies, which may be challenging for health-care providers to understand and utilize in counseling patients, particularly as the field continues to evolve. How these new tests should be integrated into current screening programs and their effect on health-care costs remain uncertain.

Efficacy of the genetic sonogram in a stepwise sequential protocol for down syndrome screening

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the genetic sonogram in Down syndrome screening for women who have received the stepwise sequential test.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included women with singleton pregnancies who underwent stepwise sequential (first-trimester combined and second-trimester serum) screening and then had a genetic sonogram between March 2005 and January 2010. Stepwise sequential Down syndrome risks were multiplied by either a positive or negative likelihood ratio based on the second-trimester sonographic findings to determine the final Down syndrome risk. A final Down syndrome risk of 1:270 or higher was considered screen positive.

RESULTS

A total of 6286 women fulfilled our criteria, including 17 with Down syndrome-affected fetuses. After stepwise sequential testing, the Down syndrome detection rate was 88.2% (15 of 17), and after the genetic sonogram, there was a non-significant reduction in detection to 82.4% (14 of 17; P > .05). For the 6269 unaffected pregnancies, the genetic sonogram converted 58 screen-negative results (1%) to positive and 183 screen-positive results (3.1%) to negative. The net effect was a change in the false-positive rate from 6.2% (390 of 6269) after stepwise sequential screening to 4.2% (266 of 6269) after the genetic sonogram.

CONCLUSIONS

The genetic sonogram should be applied cautiously for women who have received prior prenatal screening tests. Women with screen-positive results need to be counseled that a negative sonographic result can be falsely reassuring. Conversely, for women with screen-negative results who have a risk close to the cutoff, a sonographic examination could assist in the decision of whether to accept or reject amniocentesis.

Non-Invasive Screening Tools for Down's Syndrome: A Review

Down's syndrome (DS) is the most common genetic cause of developmental delay with an incidence of 1 in 800 live births, and is the predominant reason why women choose to undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis. However, as invasive tests are associated with around a 1% risk of miscarriage new non-invasive tests have been long sought after. Recently, the most promising approach for non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) has been provided by the introduction of next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies. The clinical application of NIPD for DS detection is not yet applicable, as large scale validation studies in low-risk pregnancies need to be completed. Currently, prenatal screening is still the first line test for the detection of fetal aneuploidy. Screening cannot diagnose DS, but developing a more advanced screening program can help to improve detection rates, and therefore reduce the number of women offered invasive tests. This article describes how the prenatal screening program has developed since the introduction of maternal age as the original "screening" test, and subsequently discusses recent advances in detecting new screening markers with reference to both proteomic and bioinformatic techniques.

Quality of nuchal translucency measurements correlates with broader aspects of program rigor and culture of excellence

INTRODUCTION

To determine if nuchal translucency (NT) quality correlates with the extent to which clinics vary in rigor and quality control.

METHODS

We correlated NT performance quality (bias and precision) of 246,000 patients with two alternative measures of clinic culture - % of cases for whom nasal bone (NB) measurements were performed and % of requisitions correctly filled for race-ethnicity and weight.

RESULTS

When requisition errors occurred in <5% of cases, the average MoM (multiple of the median) was 0.97. When >5% (33%), the curve lowered to 0.93 MoM (p < 0.001) with both bias and precision of measurements impaired. Likewise, for centers with NB >90%, MoM was 0.99 compared to those <10% at 0.93 (p < 0.001). Precision and bias were highly correlated (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Rigor in NT measurements has improved, but the discussion has been confined to individuals. Progressive educational and remediation strategies need to expand to a second dimension - clinics themselves. Cross-clinic variation in NT quality exists independent of individual variation in NT quality, and two divergent indices of program rigor are associated with NT quality. Quality control must be program wide, and to effect continued improvement in the quality of NT results across time, the cultures of clinics must become a target for intervention.

"Taking its toll": the challenges of working in fetal medicine

BACKGROUND

Advances in genetic technologies have resulted in the diagnosis during pregnancy of increasing numbers of fetal abnormalities. A few published personal commentaries have indicated that health professionals' interactions with couples at risk of a fetal abnormality can be emotionally and ethically challenging, highlighting the need for empirical research in this area. This study sought to explore whether working in the fetal medicine setting has an effect on health professionals and to ascertain any supports used to manage these effects.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with 40 medical and allied health professionals working in fetal medicine settings in Melbourne, Australia. Qualitative analysis of the interview data was performed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants discussed at length the emotional impact of working with patients who were experiencing adverse pregnancy outcomes. All participants reported that working in fetal medicine had an impact on their daily lives, and many spoke about dreaming about or losing sleep over patient outcomes. Participants described working in this setting as being particularly difficult when they were pregnant themselves. Most spoke about feeling largely unsupported in their work and felt that these effects resulted in burnout and staff turnover.

CONCLUSIONS

This study explored several work force concerns in fetal medicine. Health professionals working with couples at risk of a fetal abnormality are vulnerable to the phenomena of compassion fatigue and burnout. The need for formal support and self-care management is suggested.

Variables influencing pregnancy termination following prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosome abnormalities

The objective of this study was to identify variables that may influence the decision to terminate or continue a pregnancy affected by a chromosome abnormality. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 286 pregnancies diagnosed with a chromosome abnormality following genetic counseling and prenatal diagnosis. Data obtained included procedure type, chromosome results, ethnicity, maternal age, use of fertility treatments, and uptake of genetic counseling after results, among other factors. Wilcoxon rank sum test, Fisher's exact test, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used for data analysis. The overall termination rate in this study was 82.9 %. A lower likelihood to terminate was found in pregnancies with a diagnosis of a sex chromosome abnormality (OR 0.05, p < .0001), Filipina race (OR 0.10, p = .03), and uptake of second genetic counseling session (OR 0.05, p < .0001). Prior history of termination was associated with increased likelihood to terminate (OR 8.6, p = .02). Factors revealing no statistically significant association with termination included maternal age, gestational age, clinic site, fetal gender, ultrasound anomalies, reason for referral and who informed the patient. Our data affirm the complexity of the decision making process and reinforce that providers should refrain from making assumptions regarding a patient's likelihood to terminate based on factors such as maternal age, gestational age, type of procedure, or ultrasound.

Non-invasive prenatal diagnostics using next generation sequencing: technical, legal and social challenges

INTRODUCTION

Newly developed non-invasive prenatal diagnostic techniques, using maternal blood samples, have the potential to reduce or obviate the need for invasive prenatal diagnostic practices such as amniocentesis or chorionic villous sampling. This will lead to a change in how obstetric care is extended by health care providers to pregnant women at-risk of bearing an aneuploid child.

AREAS COVERED

The process leading to the development of fetal aneuploidy detection via the analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma by massive parallel sequencing. Optimization of these strategies and approaches used in the recent or up-coming commercial launches. In addition, this review provides insight into legal implications, potential patent disputes, ethical and societal concerns raised by this development, such as whole genome data storage, retrieval and access.

EXPERT OPINION

There is a need for engagement by professional societies, to ensure correct usage of these newly emerging technologies and their restriction to high-risk pregnancies. National agencies need to ensure the necessary degree of high quality required for prenatal diagnosis.

Tracking fetal development through molecular analysis of maternal biofluids

Current monitoring of fetal development includes fetal ultrasonography, chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis for chromosome analysis, and maternal serum biochemical screening for analytes associated with aneuploidy and open neural tube defects. Over the last 15 years, significant advances in noninvasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) via cell-free fetal (cff) nucleic acids in maternal plasma have resulted in the ability to determine fetal sex, RhD genotype, and aneuploidy. Cff nucleic acids in the maternal circulation originate primarily from the placenta. This contrasts with cff nucleic acids in amniotic fluid, which derive from the fetus, and are present in significantly higher concentrations than in maternal blood. The fetal origin of cff nucleic acids in the amniotic fluid permits the acquisition of real-time information about fetal development and gene expression. This review seeks to provide a comprehensive summary of the molecular analysis of cff nucleic acids in maternal biofluids to elucidate mechanisms of fetal development, physiology, and pathology. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Molecular Genetics of Human Reproductive Failure.

Genetics and bioethics: how our thinking has changed since 1969

In 1969, the field of human genetics was in its infancy. Amniocentesis was a new technique for prenatal diagnosis, and a newborn genetic screening program had been established in one state. There were also concerns about the potential hazards of genetic engineering. A research group at the Hastings Center and Paul Ramsey pioneered in the discussion of genetics and bioethics. Two principal techniques have emerged as being of enduring importance: human gene transfer research and genetic testing and screening. This essay tracks the development and use of these techniques and considers the ethical issues that they raise.

Meeting patients' education and decision-making needs for first trimester prenatal aneuploidy screening

OBJECTIVE

First trimester aneuploidy screening introduces unique challenges to patient education and informed decision-making. Our study assessed the decision-making process among those pregnant patients presenting for this new form of aneuploidy screening.

METHOD

A survey instrument was used to assess components of decision-making among women who presented for first trimester aneuploidy screening. Knowledge and leading factors in the decision-making process were measured.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 139) demonstrated understanding of the etiology of Down syndrome, but less understanding of its cognitive (65.2%) and physical manifestations (58.7%). Few were able to determine risk from first trimester screen results (36.7%). Participants were more familiar with amniocentesis (84.2%) than chorionic villus sampling (73.4%), though less familiar with procedural risks (29.5% and 28.1%, respectively). The majority of participants ranked the following as key information in their decision: knowledge of their intentions about the outcome of the pregnancy based on the test results (92.4%), knowledge of chorionic villus sampling to evaluate an abnormal result (92.0%), and values and beliefs about termination (89.1%).

CONCLUSION

First trimester aneuploidy screening generates education and decision-making benchmarks for patients and providers. It is important to address these barriers as this new screen becomes a growing part of current prenatal genetic testing offerings.

Comparison of combined, stepwise sequential, contingent, and integrated screening in 7292 high-risk pregnant women

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of combined, stepwise sequential, and contingent screening versus the integrated test in detecting fetal aneuploidies.

STUDY DESIGN

First trimester combined test, sequential second trimester, and contingent risks were retrospectively calculated for 7292 unselected pregnant women with singleton pregnancies who had received integrated screening. The first trimester testing was based on nuchal translucency, pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A, and free-beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (free β-hCG) and the second trimester tests were alpha-fetoprotein, hCG, and unconjugated estriol. A second trimester risk of 1:250 defined a positive result for all protocols with the contingent protocol based on additional second trimester testing for those with risks between 1:30 and 1:1200.

RESULTS

Among the population submitted for the integrated test, the detection rate was 19/21 (90%) for Down syndrome (DS) and 6/6 (100%) for Edwards syndrome (ES) and the DS false-positive rate (FPR) was 247/7271 (3.4%). Provision of the first trimester combined test alone would have resulted in a 17/21 (81%) detection rate for DS, that of 4/6 (67%) for ES and a DS FPR of 292/7271 (4.0%). The sequential and contingent approaches had the same final detection rates as the integrated test but potentially allowed a high proportion of the affected pregnancies to be detected in the first trimester. The lowest net DS FPR was seen with the contingent approach (2.6%) and using this protocol only 12.7% of women would have required second trimester testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated, sequential, and contingent screenings are all more efficacious than the combined test. Overall, the contingent approach was the most efficient with a high-detection rate, the lowest FPR, and the least amount of testing.