Follow-up of multiple aneuploidies and single monosomies detected by noninvasive prenatal testing: implications for management and counseling

Prenatal diagnosis, pregnancy determination and follow up of sex chromosome aneuploidy screened by non-invasive prenatal testing from 122 453 unselected singleton pregnancies: A retrospective analysis of 7-year experience

The phenotype of SCA patients are diversities, make prenatal counseling and parental decision-making following the prenatal diagnosis of SCA more complicated and challenging. NIPT has higher sensitivity and specificity in screening trisomy 21 syndrome, but the effectiveness of NIPT in detecting SCA is still controversial. This study is a large-scale retrospective cohort of positive SCA screened from unselected singleton pregnancies by non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) from a single prenatal center of a tertiary hospital. Clinical information, indications, diagnostic results, ultrasound findings, pregnancy determinations, and follow-up were reviewed and analyzed. 596 cases of SCA positive were screened out of 122 453, giving a positive detection rate of 0.49%. 510 cases (85.6%) conducted with amniocentesis to detect fetal chromosome, of which 236 were confirmed as true positive of SCA with PPV of 46.3% (236/510). Of the 236 cases confirmed as true positive SCA, 114 cases (48.3%)chose to terminate the pregnancy (93.0%, 65.3%, 15.4% and 10.9% for 45,X, 47,XXY, 47,XXX and 47,XYY, respectively), 122 cases (51.7%) elected to continue the pregnancy. In conclusions, NIPT as a first-tier routine method for screening autosomal aneuploidies, also could play an important role in screening SCA. Low-risk pregnant women are the main indication for the detection of SCA as NIPT test provides to non-selective population. For 47,XXX and 47,XYY with mild phenotype, couples would like to continue the pregnancy. But for 45,X and 47,XXY, parents apt to terminate pregnancy no matter ultrasound abnormalities were found or not.

Non-invasive prenatal testing: when results suggests maternal cancer

It is now well-established that non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), originally designed to screen cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal blood for the presence of common fetal trisomies, can lead to incidental detection of occult maternal malignancies. Retrospective evaluations have demonstrated that the detection of multiple copy number alterations in cfDNA is particularly suggestive of an incipient tumor and that cancer detection rates not only depend on tumor biology but also on applied NIPT technologies and downstream diagnostic investigations. Since the identification of a maternal cancer in pregnancy has implications for both woman and the unborn child, prospective studies are needed to provide evidence on best clinical practices and on clinical utility in terms of patient outcomes.

Incidental Detection of Malignancies With Cell-Free DNA Screening

Cell-free circulating DNA is an evolving technology with important clinical applications in both obstetric care and oncology. In the challenging patient with pregnancy and co-existing malignancy, the utility of cell-free DNA both for aneuploidy screening and cancer identification is an area of active research. Understanding the physiology associated with circulating cell-free DNA and subsequent laboratory evaluation is critical for clinicians caring for the obstetric patient with cell-free fetal DNA screening results suggestive of malignancy. Ongoing research is necessary to determine best practices for the evaluation and management of these patients with promising applications in the advancement of precision medicine.

Chorionic Villous Testing Versus Amniocentesis After Abnormal Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

In the setting of a normal first-trimester ultrasound, an amniocentesis may be a better option than chorionic villous sampling for invasive diagnostic testing after a cell-free DNA high risk for trisomy 13, given the high rates of confined placental mosaicism. In unaffected fetuses, other evaluations should be considered depending on the cell-free DNA results, including maternal karyotyping for monosomy X, uniparental disomy testing for chromosomes with imprinted genes, serial growth scans for trisomy 16, and a workup for maternal malignancy for multiple aneuploidies or autosomal monosomy.

Noninvasive prenatal screening and maternal malignancy: role of imaging

Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) tests for fetal chromosomal anomalies through maternal blood sampling. It is becoming widely available and standard of care for pregnant women in many countries. It is performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, usually between 9 and 12 weeks. Fragments of fetal cell-free deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) floating in maternal plasma are detected and analyzed by this test to assess for chromosomal aberrations. Similarly, maternal tumor-derived cell-free DNA (ctDNA) released from the tumor cells also circulates in the plasma. Hence, the presence of genomic anomalies originating from maternal tumor-derived DNA may be detected on the NIPS-based fetal risk assessment in pregnant patients. Presence of multiple aneuploidies or autosomal monosomies are the most commonly reported NIPS abnormalities detected with occult maternal malignancies. When such results are received, the search for an occult maternal malignancy begins, in which imaging plays a crucial role. The most commonly detected malignancies via NIPS are leukemia, lymphoma, breast and colon cancers. Ultrasound is a reasonable radiation-free modality for imaging during pregnancy, specially when there are localizing symptoms or findings, such as palpable lumps. While there are no consensus guidelines on the imaging evaluation for these patients, when there are no localizing symptoms or clinically palpable findings, whole body MRI is recommended as the radiation-free modality of choice to search for an occult malignancy. Based on clinical symptoms, practice patterns, and available resources, breast ultrasound, chest radiographs, and targeted ultrasound evaluations can also be performed initially or as a follow-up for MRI findings. CT is reserved for exceptional circumstances due to its higher radiation dose. This article intends to increase awareness of this rare but stressful clinical scenario and guide imaging evaluation for occult malignancy detected via NIPS during pregnancy.

Maternal Malignancy After Atypical Findings on Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism-Based Prenatal Cell-Free DNA Screening

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence and clinical outcomes of cell-free DNA results suspicious for maternal malignancy on prenatal cell-free DNA screening with single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based technology.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included data from SNP-based, noninvasive prenatal screening samples from a commercial laboratory from January 2015 to October 2021. Maternal plasma was screened for trisomy 21, 18, and 13; monosomy X; and triploidy. Cases were considered suspicious for maternal malignancy if retrospective bioinformatics and visual inspection of the SNP plot were suggestive of multiple maternal copy number variants across at least two of the tested chromosomes. Clinical follow-up on patients was obtained by contacting individual referring clinician offices by telephone, facsimile, or email.

RESULTS

A total of 2,004,428 noninvasive prenatal screening samples during the study period met criteria for inclusion in the analysis. Of these, 38 samples (0.002% or 1 in 52,748, 95% CI 1:74,539-1:38,430) had SNP-plot results that were suspicious for maternal malignancy. Maternal health outcomes were obtained in 30 of these patients (78.9%); eight were lost to follow-up. Maternal malignancy or suspected malignancy was identified in 66.7% (20/30) of the 30 patients with clinical follow-up provided by the clinic. The most common maternal malignancies were lymphoma (n=10), breast cancer (n=5), and colon cancer (n=3).

CONCLUSION

Results suspicious for maternal malignancy are rare with SNP-based noninvasive prenatal screening (1:53,000), but two thirds of patients who had a noninvasive prenatal screening result concerning for malignancy in this study had a cancer diagnosis. Investigation for malignancy should be recommended for all pregnant patients with this type of result.

FUNDING SOURCE

This study was funded by Natera, Inc.

Incidental finding of maternal malignancy in an unusual non-invasive prenatal test and a review of similar cases

We present a clinical case where a complex abnormal non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) result in a research project revealed carcinoma of the breast in the pregnant woman. Furthermore, the NIPT result did not demonstrate the same fetal chromosomal aberration as the chorion villus sample. A literature search for similar cases was performed identifying 43 unique cases, where abnormal NIPT results were related to maternal malignancy. Malignancy is a rare but important cause of complex abnormal non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) results and should be considered when fetal karyotype and abnormal NIPT results are discordant. Furthermore, a follow-up invasive sample is essential for correct fetal diagnosis when abnormal NIPT results are found.

Systematic evidence-based review: The application of noninvasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA in general-risk pregnancies

PURPOSE

Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in high-risk populations. This systematic evidence review evaluates NIPS performance in a general-risk population.

METHODS

Medline (PubMed) and Embase were used to identify studies examining detection of Down syndrome (T21), trisomy 18 (T18), trisomy 13 (T13), sex chromosome aneuploidies, rare autosomal trisomies, copy number variants, and maternal conditions, as well as studies assessing the psychological impact of NIPS and the rate of subsequent diagnostic testing. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate pooled estimates of NIPS performance (P < .05). Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 87 studies met inclusion criteria. Diagnostic odds ratios were significant (P < .0001) for T21, T18, and T13 for singleton and twin pregnancies. NIPS was accurate (≥99.78%) in detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies. Performance for rare autosomal trisomies and copy number variants was variable. Use of NIPS reduced diagnostic tests by 31% to 79%. Conclusions regarding psychosocial outcomes could not be drawn owing to lack of data. Identification of maternal conditions was rare.

CONCLUSION

NIPS is a highly accurate screening method for T21, T18, and T13 in both singleton and twin pregnancies.

Cancer Diagnoses Following Abnormal Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: A Case Series, Literature Review, and Proposed Management Model

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a screening test for fetal chromosomal aneuploidy using cell-free DNA derived from maternal blood. It has been rapidly accepted into obstetric practice because of its application from 10-weeks' gestation, and its high sensitivity and specificity. NIPT results can be influenced by several factors including placental or maternal mosaicism and co-twin demise; cell-free DNA from a maternal origin can also complicate interpretation, with evidence that NIPT can detect previously unsuspected malignancies. This study aimed to develop management guidelines for women with NIPT results suspicious of maternal malignancy. The Peter MacCallum Cancer Center's experience of seven cases where abnormal NIPT results led to investigation for maternal malignancy between 2016 and 2019 were reviewed, along with the published literature. Six of the seven women (86%) referred for investigation were diagnosed with advanced malignancies, including colorectal cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. Based on our single-center experience, as well as the available literature, guidelines for the investigation of women with NIPT results suspicious of malignancy are proposed, including utilization of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, which had a high concordance with other investigations and diagnoses. These guidelines include maternal and fetal investigations, as well as consideration of the complex medical, psychologic, social, and ethical needs of these patients and their families.

Fetal Screening for Chromosomal Abnormalities

With more and more reproductive-aged women opting to pursue genetic screening during pregnancy, health care professionals must understand the variety of testing options available as well as the advantages and limitations of each testing option. Presently, no single screening test is universally believed to be superior because the combination of the specific test and the population being tested determines the range of potential identifiable conditions as well as the positive predictive values. As a result, pre- and posttest counseling are not always straightforward and may require discussions with multiple specialists including genetic counselors, obstetricians, and pediatricians/neonatologists. The purpose of this review is to summarize the screening options currently available to pregnant women to determine their risk of having a child affected by a chromosomal disorder. Screening for chromosomal abnormalities using ultrasonography, maternal serum analytes, cell-free DNA, and preimplantation genetic testing will be discussed here. Advances in the field, including the possible future use of cell-based noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) as a more accurate method for genetic screening and the incorporation of screening for copy number variants (microdeletions and duplications) into traditional cell-free NIPS will also be reviewed.

Comprehensive genome-wide analysis of routine non-invasive test data allows cancer prediction: A single-center retrospective analysis of over 85,000 pregnancies

BACKGROUND

Implausible false positive results in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) have been occasionally associated with the detection of occult maternal malignancies. Hence, there is a need for approaches allowing accurate prediction of whether the NIPT result is pointing to an underlying malignancy, as well as for organized programs ensuring efficient downstream clinical management of these cases.

METHODS

Using a data set of 88,294 NIPT performed at University Hospital Leuven (Belgium) between November 2013 and March 2020, we retrospectively evaluated the positive predictive value (PPV) of our NIPT approach for cancer detection. In this approach, whole-genome cell-free DNA (cfDNA) data from NIPT were scrutinized for the presence of (sub)chromosomal copy number alterations (CNAs) predictive for a malignancy, using an unbiased NIPT analysis pipeline coined GIPSeq. For suspected cases, the presence of a maternal cancer was evaluated via subsequent multidisciplinary clinical follow-up examinations. The cancer-specificity of the identified CNAs in cfDNA was assessed through genetic analyses of a tumor biopsy.

FINDINGS

Fifteen women without a cancer history were identified with a GIPSeq result suggestive of a malignant process. Their cfDNA profiles showed either genome-wide aberrations or a single trisomy 8. Upon clinical examinations, a solid or hematological cancer was identified in 4 and 7 cases, respectively. Three women were identified as having a clonal mosaicism. For one case no underlying condition was found. These numbers add to a PPV of 73%. Based on this experience, we presented a multidisciplinary care path for efficient clinical management of these cases.

INTERPRETATION

The presented approach for analysing NIPT results has a high PPV, yet unknown sensitivity, for detecting asymptomatic malignancies upon routine NIPT. Given the complexity of diagnosing a pregnant woman with cancer, clinical follow-up should occur in a well-designed multidisciplinary setting, such as via the care model that we presented here.

FUNDING

This work was supported by Research Foundation Flanders and KU Leuven funding.

Cell-free fetal DNA coming in all sizes and shapes

Cell‐free fetal DNA analysis has an established role in prenatal assessments. It serves as a source of fetal genetic material that is accessible non‐invasively from maternal blood. Through the years, evidence has accumulated to show that cell‐free fetal DNA molecules are derived from placental tissues, are mainly of short DNA fragments and have rapid post‐delivery clearance profiles. But questions regarding how they come to being short molecules from placental cells and in which physical forms do they exist remained largely unanswered until recently. We now know that the distributions of ending sites of cell‐free DNA molecules are non‐random across the genome and bear correlations with the chromatin structures of cells from which they have originated. Such an insight offers ways to deduce the tissue‐of‐origin of these molecules. Besides, the physical nature and sequence characteristics of the ends of each cell‐free DNA molecule provide tell‐tale signs of how the DNA fragmentation processes are orchestrated by nuclease enzymes. These realizations offered opportunities to develop methods for enriching cell‐free fetal DNA to facilitate non‐invasive prenatal diagnostics. Here we aimed to collate what is known about the biological and physical characteristics of cell‐free fetal DNA into one article and explain the implications of these observations.

What’s already known about this topic?

Cell‐free fetal DNA originates from placental tissues and circulates in maternal plasma as a minor population in the form of short fragments which disappears from maternal circulation rapidly after delivery.

What does this study add?

Cell‐free DNA studies at the per molecule per nucleotide level documented the detailed genomic distributions, fragment end characteristics and physical forms of cell‐free DNA unveiling the fine feature differences between maternal and fetal DNA as well as their intricate relationships with the chromatin structure of the cells‐of‐origin. These studies have substantially bridged the knowledge gaps in the biology of cell‐free fetal DNA and may provide insights on how to enhance prenatal tests based on their analyses.

Trends in prenatal diagnosis: An analysis of 40 years of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms in publications

OBJECTIVE

To understand the evolution of the field of prenatal diagnosis over the past four decades.

METHOD

We analyzed the publications in the journal Prenatal Diagnosis from its inception in 1980 to 2019 using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) to examine the major research topics and trends. The results were analyzed by 10-year intervals.

RESULTS

Publications on prenatal cytogenetics, congenital anomalies and fetal imaging predominated during the first three decades, with a steady increase in molecular genetics over time. Publications on NIPT did not appear until the most recent decade and are likely under-counted because there was no MeSH term for NIPT until 2020.

CONCLUSION

The topics covered in Prenatal Diagnosis articles have evolved considerably over the past four decades and reflect a response to advances in technology and widespread incorporation of prenatal screening and diagnosis into standard obstetric care. The strengths of this analysis are its objective nature, its use of the standard MeSH terms used for coding, and application of a novel cluster analysis to visualize trends. The analysis also pointed out the fact that MeSH terms in this sub-specialty area are often inconsistent due to manually coding based on individual subject matter expertise.

Double aneuploidy 48,ХХХ,+21 of a Bulgarian newborn with Down phenotype: a case report

Background

Aneuploidy is one of the most important chromosomal aberrations, which involves an abnormal number of the chromosomes. Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) and numerical aberrations of the sex chromosomes have a relatively high prevalence in the general population. However, the patients usually have one of the above genetic disorders and combined cases of two different trisomies are unusual.

Case presentation

We report a case of a patient with double aneuploidy—a combination of trisomy 21 and triple X syndrome. The proband had typical features of Down syndrome and did not manifest any symptoms of polysomy X. The patient had hypotonia, a cardiac defect, and an annular pancreas. A clinical diagnosis of Down syndrome was established, but the cytogenetic analysis found two free full trisomies—trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) and triple X.

Conclusion

Cases of double aneuploidy, combining trisomy 21 and trisomy of a sex chromosome, could be challenging because the patients manifest only symptoms, typical for Down syndrome. The discovery of a second complete free trisomy X in our case was an incidental finding. This illustrates the importance of the cytogenetic analysis, despite the evident phenotype of trisomy 21.

Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 226

Prenatal testing for chromosomal abnormalities is designed to provide an accurate assessment of a patient's risk of carrying a fetus with a chromosomal disorder. A wide variety of prenatal screening and diagnostic tests are available; each offers varying levels of information and performance, and each has relative advantages and limitations. When considering screening test characteristics, no one test is superior in all circumstances, which results in the need for nuanced, patient-centered counseling from the obstetric care professional and complex decision making by the patient. Each patient should be counseled in each pregnancy about options for testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. It is important that obstetric care professionals be prepared to discuss not only the risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities but also the relative benefits and limitations of the available screening and diagnostic tests. Testing for chromosomal abnormalities should be an informed patient choice based on provision of adequate and accurate information, the patient's clinical context, accessible health care resources, values, interests, and goals. All patients should be offered both screening and diagnostic tests, and all patients have the right to accept or decline testing after counseling.The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to provide current information regarding the available screening test options available for fetal chromosomal abnormalities and to review their benefits, performance characteristics, and limitations. For information regarding prenatal diagnostic testing for genetic disorders, refer to Practice Bulletin No. 162, Prenatal Diagnostic Testing for Genetic Disorders. For additional information regarding counseling about genetic testing and communicating test results, refer to Committee Opinion No. 693, Counseling About Genetic Testing and Communication of Genetic Test Results. For information regarding carrier screening for genetic conditions, refer to Committee Opinion No. 690, Carrier Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine and Committee Opinion No. 691, Carrier Screening for Genetic Conditions. This Practice Bulletin has been revised to further clarify methods of screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities, including expanded information regarding the use of cell-free DNA in all patients regardless of maternal age or baseline risk, and to add guidance related to patient counseling.

Discordant fetal sex on NIPT and ultrasound

Prenatal diagnosis of sex discordance is a relatively new phenomenon. Prior to cell-free DNA testing, the diagnosis of a disorder of sexual differentiation was serendipitous, either through identification of ambiguous genitalia at the midtrimester morphology ultrasound or discovery of genotype-phenotype discordance in cases where preimplantation genetic diagnosis or invasive prenatal testing had occurred. The widespread integration of cfDNA testing into modern antenatal screening has made sex chromosome assessment possible from 10 weeks of gestation, and discordant fetal sex is now more commonly diagnosed prenatally, with a prevalence of approximately 1 in 1500-2000 pregnancies. Early detection of phenotype-genotype sex discordance is important as it may indicate an underlying genetic, chromosomal or biochemical condition and it also allows for time-critical postnatal treatment. The aim of this article is to review cfDNA and ultrasound diagnosis of fetal sex, identify possible causes of phenotype-genotype discordance and provide a systematic approach for clinicians when counseling and managing couples in this circumstance.

Evidence of compliance with and effectiveness of guidelines for noninvasive prenatal testing in China: a retrospective study of 189,809 cases

In China, the medical guidelines recommend performing noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) with caution for pregnant women aged 35 years or older. However, the Mother and Child Health Care Law suggests that all primiparous women whose age is older than 35 years undergo prenatal diagnosis. These two inconsistent suggestions/recommendations have made obstetricians confused about whether to offer NIPT to these older pregnant women. To face this issue and find out the solution we performed a retrospective study of 189,809 NIPT samples collected from 28 provincial-leveled administrative units in China. Of 1,564 women with high-risk pregnancies who underwent NIPT, 459 (29.3%) did not participate in follow-up. The compound sensitivity and specificity of NIPT for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 detection was 99.1% (95% CI, 98.0%-99.6%) and 99.9% (95% CI, 98.8%-99.9%), respectively. In secundiparous women, NIPT showed high sensitivity and specificity similar to that in primiparous women. The observed risk for trisomies 21 and 18 significantly increased when the maternal age was 39 and older. After the publication of the current NIPT policy, the follow-up rate at our center was 91.9%; however, a large number of women are not in maternal and infant care networks nationwide, and that makes the follow-up rate outside our center relatively low. Our study shows that to balance the prevention of major aneuploidies and the limited resources for prenatal diagnosis, the cut-off age of 35 for invasive prenatal diagnosis might be unnecessary. Although the NIPT guidelines are well written, how to practice it effectively, especially in less industrialized areas, is worth discussing.

Prenatal maternal biomarkers for the early diagnosis of congenital malformations: A review

Congenital anomalies cause ~7% of all neonatal deaths, many of which have no identified pathophysiological cause. Because accurate and robust laboratory tests are unavailable for most birth defects, physicians rely on imaging such as ultrasound and MRI. Biomarkers from human body fluids are considered a powerful diagnostic tool to assess human disease and health as it mirrors an individual's condition. Minimally invasive 'liquid biopsies' from blood samples are highly valuable for diagnosis, prognosis, risk assessment, and treatment of many conditions. Recent large-scale analysis ('omics') have enabled researchers to identify novel biomarkers in different areas. To accurately facilitate the early detection of congenital anomalies, the identification of biomarkers from maternal plasma should be promoted. This approach will uncover new opportunities in prenatal diagnosing and likely lead to a better understanding of the pathogenesis of congenital anomalies.

Quality Assurance of Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPS) for Fetal Aneuploidy Using Positive Predictive Values as Outcome Measures

Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) based on the analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma has been shown to have high sensitivity and specificity. We gathered follow-up information for pregnancies in women with test-positive NIPS results from 2014–2017 with quarterly assessments of positive predictive values (PPVs). A non-inferiority analysis with a minimum requirement of 70%/80% of expected performance for trisomy 21 and 18 was used to ensure testing met expectations. PPVs were evaluated in the context of changes in the population receiving testing. For all quarters, PPVs for trisomies 21 and 18 exceeded the requirement of > 70% of the reference PPV. Overall observed PPVs for trisomy 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X were similar for women aged <35 (90.9%, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 88.6–92.7%) compared to women with advanced maternal age (94.5%, 95% CI 93.1–95.6%). Despite significant declines in test-positive rates from 1.18% to 0.62% for trisomy 21, and from 0.75% to 0.48% for trisomies 18, 13 and monosomy X combined, PPVs remained stable through the four-year interval. We conclude that quarterly evaluation of PPV provides an overview of past testing and helps demonstrate long-term consistency in test performance, even in the setting of increasing use by women with lower a priori risks.

A multiplex droplet digital PCR assay for non-invasive prenatal testing of fetal aneuploidies

Higher multiplexing in droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) can simplify the detection process of ddPCR-based non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and improve its reliability, making it a practical approach in clinical practice. However, a high level of multiplex ddPCR-based NIPT has rarely been reported. In this study, we developed a multiplex ddPCR assay using universal locked nucleic acid (LNA) probes to reliably identify fetal aneuploidies. We first performed statistical analysis based on the Poisson distribution to evaluate the required number of target DNA molecules and the total number of droplets for a ddPCR assay. Next, we designed two sets of primers and probes to quantify cfDNA from chromosomes 21 and 18 and then determined the disease status of a sample. Finally, we evaluated our multiplex ddPCR assay with 60 clinical plasma samples. All of the 60 clinical samples were correctly identified. The accessibility and cost-effectiveness of our multiplex ddPCR-based NIPT make it a competitive prenatal testing method in clinical use.

The epidemic of abnormal copy number variant cases missed because of reliance upon noninvasive prenatal screening

OBJECTIVE

To assess the implications of increasing utilization of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS), which may reach 50% with the concomitant decrease in diagnostic procedures (DPs) for its impact on detection of chromosomal abnormalities.

METHODS

We studied our program's statistics over 5 years for DPs and utilization of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH). We then modeled the implications in our program if DP had not fallen and nationally of a 50% DP and aCGH testing rate using well-vetted expectations for the diagnosis of abnormal copy number variants (CNVs).

RESULTS

Our DP fell 40% from 2013-2017. Utilization of aCGH for DP nearly tripled. We detected 28 abnormal CNVs. If DP had not fallen, we likely would have detected 60. With 4 million US births per year, 2 million DPs would detect 30 000 abnormal CNVs and 4000 standard aneuploidies. At a 1/500 complication-pregnancy loss rate, the detection/complication ratio is 8.5/1.

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive prenatal screening has significantly changed the practice of prenatal screening. However, while increasing the detection of Down syndrome, the concomitant decrease in DP and lack of aCGH results in missing many more abnormalities than the increase in Down syndrome and complications of DP combined. From a public health perspective, such represents a missed opportunity for overall health care delivery.

Maternal Malignancy Evaluation After Discordant Cell-Free DNA Results

Cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy is a commonly used testing strategy in pregnancies at high risk for fetal aneuploidy. The use of cell-free DNA screening is expanding to the low-risk population, because the detection rate for trisomy 21 surpasses that of traditional screening modalities. Although the sensitivity and specificity of cell-free DNA are superior to traditional screening, false-positive results do occur and may indicate an adverse maternal health condition, including maternal mosaicism or, rarely, malignancy. The risk of maternal cancer is significantly elevated when more than one aneuploidy is detected that is discordant from fetal karyotype. Given this risk as well as the rising incidence of cancer in pregnancy, patient counseling and malignancy evaluation should be considered in women when more than one aneuploidy is detected. We reviewed the published literature and developed an algorithm to evaluate women when these results are identified.

Biological explanations for discordant noninvasive prenatal test results: Preliminary data and lessons learned

OBJECTIVE

Maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis is a powerful screening tool for Down syndrome. In a pilot series, we examined biologic causes of discordance between the cfDNA test results and the fetal karyotype. We also explored the feasibility of obtaining trio biospecimens by using parental engagement.

METHODS

A convenience sample of women with discordant cfDNA results were recruited by their care providers. We provided shipping materials and instructions for biospecimen collection. Maternal, newborn, and placental samples were examined with droplet digital PCR.

RESULTS

Thirteen of 15 women successfully had biospecimens obtained remotely. High-quality DNA was extracted in 12 of 13 women. Presumed biologic etiologies for discordance were identified in 7 of 12 women: 3 cases from additional clinical review (male renal transplant, vanishing twin, and colon cancer) and 4 cases from additional laboratory investigation using droplet digital PCR (3 with confined placental mosaicism and 1 with true fetal mosaicism).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the biology behind cfDNA-fetal karyotype discordancy is useful for follow-up clinical care. Our study suggests that most cases could be resolved by using a trio biospecimen protocol and parental involvement. To improve accuracy, additional sequencing of biospecimens will be required.

Rare autosomal trisomies, revealed by maternal plasma DNA sequencing, suggest increased risk of feto-placental disease

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) can potentially evaluate all 24 chromosomes to identify abnormalities of the placenta, fetus, or pregnant woman. Current bioinformatics algorithms typically only report on chromosomes 21, 18, 13, X, and Y; sequencing results from other chromosomes may be masked. We hypothesized that by systematically analyzing WGS data from all chromosomes, we could identify rare autosomal trisomies (RATs) to improve understanding of feto-placental biology. We analyzed two independent cohorts from clinical laboratories, both of which used a similar quality control parameter, normalized chromosome denominator quality. The entire data set included 89,817 samples. Samples flagged for analysis and classified as abnormal were 328 of 72,932 (0.45%) and 71 of 16,885 (0.42%) in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Clinical outcome data were available for 57 of 71 (80%) of abnormal cases in cohort 2. Visual analysis of WGS data demonstrated RATs, copy number variants, and extensive genome-wide imbalances. Trisomies 7, 15, 16, and 22 were the most frequently observed RATs in both cohorts. Cytogenetic or pregnancy outcome data were available in 52 of 60 (87%) of cases with RATs in cohort 2. Cases with RATs detected were associated with miscarriage, true fetal mosaicism, and confirmed or suspected uniparental disomy. Comparing the trisomic fraction with the fetal fraction allowed estimation of possible mosaicism. Analysis and reporting of aneuploidies in all chromosomes can clarify cases in which cfDNA findings on selected "target" chromosomes (21, 18, and 13) are discordant with the fetal karyotype and may identify pregnancies at risk of miscarriage and other complications.

Origin and clinical relevance of chromosomal aberrations other than the common trisomies detected by genome-wide NIPS: results of the TRIDENT study

PurposeNoninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA in maternal blood is highly sensitive for detecting fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13. Using a genome-wide approach, other chromosome anomalies can also be detected. We report on the origin, frequency, and clinical significance of these other chromosome aberrations found in pregnancies at risk for trisomy 21, 18, or 13.MethodsWhole-genome shallow massively parallel sequencing was used and all autosomes were analyzed.ResultsIn 78 of 2,527 cases (3.1%) NIPS was indicative of trisomy 21, 18, or 13, and in 41 (1.6%) of other chromosome aberrations. The latter were of fetal (n = 10), placental (n = 22), maternal (n = 1) or unknown (n = 7). One case lacked cytogenetic follow-up. Nine of the 10 fetal cases were associated with an abnormal phenotype. Thirteen of the 22 (59%) placental aberrations were associated with fetal congenital anomalies and/or poor fetal growth ( Collapse

Key Words

• confined placental mosaicism; genome-wide nips
• noninvasive testing
• prenatal screening
• trisomy 21

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Chromosome Aberrations
• Chromosome Disorders/diagnosis
• Chromosome Disorders/genetics
• DNA Copy Number Variations
• Female
• Genetic Testing/methods
• Genomics/methods
• Humans
• Placenta/metabolism
• Pregnancy
• Pregnancy Outcome
• Prenatal Diagnosis/methods
• Trisomy
• Whole Genome Sequencing

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Diane Van Opstal Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Merel C van Maarle Department of Clinical Genetics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Klaske Lichtenbelt Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Marjan M Weiss Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Heleen Schuring-Blom Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Shama L Bhola Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Mariette J V Hoffer Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Karin Huijsdens-van Amsterdam Department of Clinical Genetics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Merryn V Macville Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Angelique J A Kooper Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Brigitte H W Faas Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Lutgarde Govaerts Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Gita M Tan-Sindhunata Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Nicolette den Hollander Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Ilse Feenstra Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Robert-Jan H Galjaard Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Dick Oepkes Department of Obstetrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Stijn Ghesquiere Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Rutger W W Brouwer Erasmus Center for Biomics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Lean Beulen Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Sander Bollen Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Martin G Elferink Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Roy Straver Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Lidewij Henneman Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Godelieve C Page-Christiaens Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Erik A Sistermans Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Collapse

Have we done our last amniocentesis? Updates on cell-free DNA for Down syndrome screening

Prenatal aneuploidy screening changed significantly in 2012 when cell-free fetal deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was introduced as a noninvasive prenatal test. A noninvasive prenatal test detects cell free fragments of fetal DNA from the placenta circulating in maternal blood that coexist with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of maternal origin. Using next-generation sequencing, the noninvasive prenatal test compares maternal and fetal cfDNA ratios for chromosomes of interest (i.e., 21, 18, 13, X, and Y) to assess chromosomal aneuploidy. Compared to traditional screening using ultrasound and serum markers, the noninvasive prenatal test has superior test characteristics, including a higher detection rate and positive predictive value, and a lower false-positive rate. The noninvasive prenatal test is already used for primary screening in high-risk women and is rapidly expanding to all women. Given its increasing use, understanding the noninvasive prenatal test's limitations is critical. Discordant results (i.e. noninvasive prenatal test is positive for aneuploidy with a normal fetal karyotype) can occur because of biological processes such as aneuploidy confined to the placenta, a vanished twin, maternal aneuploidy or maternal cancer. Use of the noninvasive prenatal test for screening beyond the most common aneuploidies is not recommended. The noninvasive prenatal test is a major advance in prenatal aneuploidy screening but it is not diagnostic and does not replace invasive testing (i.e. chorionic villous sampling or amniocentesis) for confirmation of fetal chromosomal disorders.

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing of Rare Autosomal Aneuploidies by Semiconductor Sequencing

Rare autosomal aneuploidies (RAAs) can cause miscarriage or other pregnancy complications and lead to inconsistent results of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT), but many NIPT providers have not yet started to provide related services. Our aim was to develop a semiconductor sequencing platform (SSP)-based method for detecting RAAs when pregnant women performed NIPT. Fifty-three aneuploidy samples with verified karyotyping or array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) results were collected and subjected to RAAs detection using an SSP to develop a method by genomic sequencing. Various trisomies on all chromosomes other than chromosomes 17 and 19, four multiple aneusomies, one monosomy and five sex chromosome abnormalities were got by our method which can directly identify RAAs via a z-score. Then, artificial mixtures of 10% and 5% DNA were created by adding fragmented fifty-three tissue samples and used in an NIPT simulation to develop a bioinformatics analysis method which can use in NIPT. And the results were in accordance with those of karyotyping and aCGH. Therefore, our method has potential for use in NIPT. Finally, 23,823 clinical plasma samples were tested to verify the performance of our approach. Karyotyping or aCGH was performed on the positive clinical samples. In total, 188 of 23,823 clinical samples were positive (T2, n = 1; T7, n = 1; T13, n = 15; T18, n = 45; T21, n = 125; and multiple aneusomies, n = 1) and verified by karyotyping or aCGH; no sample was a false negative. Several false positives were detected, one of which showed maternal copy number variation (CNV). One case of multiple aneusomies was caused by a maternal tumor. The method developed enables detection of RAAs without increasing costs.

Cherchez la femme: maternal incidental findings can explain discordant prenatal cell-free DNA sequencing results

Circulating DNA fragments in a pregnant woman's plasma derive from three sources: placenta, maternal bone marrow, and fetus. Prenatal sequencing to noninvasively screen for fetal chromosome abnormalities is performed on this mixed sample; results can therefore reflect the maternal as well as the fetoplacental DNA. Although it is recommended that pretest counseling include the possibility of detecting maternal genomic imbalance, this seldom occurs. Maternal abnormalities that can affect a prenatal screening test result include disorders that affect the size and metabolism of DNA, such as B12 deficiency, autoimmune disease, and intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy. Similarly, maternal tumors, both benign and malignant, can release DNA fragments that contain duplications or deletions. Bioinformatics algorithms can subsequently interpret the raw sequencing data incorrectly, resulting in false-positive test reports of fetal monosomies or test failures. Maternal sex-chromosome abnormalities, both constitutional and somatic, can generate results that are discordant with fetal ultrasound examination or karyotype. Maternal copy-number variants and mosaicism for autosomal aneuploidies can also skew interpretation. A maternal etiology should therefore be considered in the differential diagnosis of prenatal cell-free DNA test failures, false-positive and false-negative sequencing results. Further study is needed regarding the clinical utility of reporting maternal incidental findings.

Noninvasive Prenatal DNA Testing: The Vanguard of Genomic Medicine

Noninvasive prenatal DNA testing is the vanguard of genomic medicine. In only four years, this screening test has revolutionized prenatal care globally and opened up new prospects for personalized medicine for the fetus. There are widespread implications for increasing the scope of human genetic variation that can be detected before birth, and for discovering more about maternofetal and placental biology. These include an urgent need to develop pretest education for all pregnant women and consistent post-test management recommendations for those with discordant test results. The reduction in invasive testing has had downstream effects on specialist training and caused many countries to re-examine their national approaches to prenatal screening. Finally, the accumulating datasets of genomic information on pregnant women and their fetuses raise ethical issues regarding consent for future data mining and intellectual property.

Prenatal cfDNA screening results indicative of maternal neoplasm: survey of current practice and management needs

OBJECTIVE

To determine genetic counselors' current practices and management needs for patients with prenatal cfDNA screening results indicative of maternal neoplasm.

METHODS

A survey was completed by genetic counselors recruited via the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC).

RESULTS

Over 300 genetic counselors were surveyed. Almost all participants (95%) were aware that Noninvasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) results may suggest maternal neoplasm, and 77% reported they would disclose such results. However, only 29% routinely communicate this possibility to patients in a pre-test setting. Management recommendations made by counselors were highly variable, and over half (51.8%) stated they would feel uncomfortable or very uncomfortable counseling a patient with these results. While less than half (44.3%) believed the current benefits of NIPT's ability to suggest maternal neoplasm outweigh its potential harms, 80.2% recognized it would be beneficial in the future. A vast majority of counselors (91.3%) felt institutional or national guidelines were needed for patient management.

CONCLUSION

A majority of counselors neither felt properly equipped nor comfortable counseling patients with prenatal cfDNA results suggestive of maternal neoplasm. This study demonstrates a need for collaboration amongst clinicians, researchers, and laboratories to publish data regarding NIPT results indicative of maternal neoplasm, and for the creation of management guidelines. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Recent advances in prenatal genetic screening and testing

The introduction of new technologies has dramatically changed the current practice of prenatal screening and testing for genetic abnormalities in the fetus. Expanded carrier screening panels and non-invasive cell-free fetal DNA-based screening for aneuploidy and single-gene disorders, and more recently for subchromosomal abnormalities, have been introduced into prenatal care. More recently introduced technologies such as chromosomal microarray analysis and whole-exome sequencing can diagnose more genetic conditions on samples obtained through amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling, including many disorders that cannot be screened for non-invasively. All of these options have benefits and limitations, and genetic counseling has become increasingly complex for providers who are responsible for guiding patients in their decisions about screening and testing before and during pregnancy.

Expanding non-invasive prenatal testing beyond chromosomes 21, 18, 13, X and Y

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) based on cell-free DNA in maternal plasma is being expanded to include additional chromosome abnormalities beyond those involving chromosomes 21, 18, 13, X and Y. Review of population cytogenetic data provides insight into the likely number of additional abnormalities detectable. Additional clinically significant and cytogenetically recognizable abnormalities are present in less than 0.1% of newborns but clinically significant, or potentially significant, sub-microscopic imbalances are expected to be present in 1.7%. Cytogenetic studies on chorionic villus samples suggests that after excluding abnormalities involving chromosomes 21, 18, 13, X and Y, approximately 0.6% of NIPT results may be positive for an unbalanced abnormality attributable to mosaicism but most of these will not be confirmed at amniocentesis or in newborns. NIPT has also been developed for specific microdeletion syndromes and initial experience is now available. Laboratory procedures such as deeper sequencing and additional data analytics are rapidly evolving but even with existing protocols, it is already clear that NIPT does not necessarily need to be limited to trisomies 21, 18, 13 and the sex-chromosome abnormalities. Patient educational materials and genetic counseling services need to be available for women offered expanded NIPT.

Follow-up of multiple aneuploidies and single monosomies detected by noninvasive prenatal testing: implications for management and counseling

Objectives

To determine the underlying biological basis for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results of multiple aneuploidies or autosomal monosomies.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of 113,415 tests to determine the study cohort, consisting of 138 (0.12%) cases reported as a single autosomal monosomy (n = 65), single trisomy with a sex chromosome aneuploidy (n = 36), or with multiple aneuploidies (n = 37). Clinical outcome information was reviewed and stratified into eight categories according to whether the karyotype or sonographic information agreed or disagreed with sequencing results.

Results

Of 67 cases with fetal or neonatal karyotypes available, 16 (24%) were partially or fully concordant with the NIPT result, 4 (6%) had aneuploidy on a reference chromosome, and 47 (70%) had normal fetal chromosomes, in which 5/47 had maternal malignancies reported. One case of maternal mosaic trisomy 8 was also detected. Of cases with no fetal karyotype information, ten had an abnormal clinical outcome, one was a normal live birth, and one reported maternal malignancy.

Conclusions

Noninvasive prenatal test results of autosomal monosomy or multiple aneuploidies are rare but have a diversity of underlying biologic causes. Some reflect the fetal karyotype; some reflect the presence of other maternal or fetal chromosome abnormalities, and a small number are linked to maternal disease. © 2016 Illumina. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

What's already known about this topic?

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been validated for common autosomal trisomies (trisomy 21, 18, and 13), sex chromosome aneuploidies, and a selection of microdeletion syndromes.

NIPT findings that are discordant with the fetal karyotype can be because of biological reasons, such as confined placental mosaicism, maternal chromosome abnormalities, and other maternal conditions such as occult malignancy.

What does this study add?

Clinical and karyotype outcome information for cases that received an NIPT result indicating an autosomal monosomy or multiple aneuploidies. Some autosomal monosomy and multiple aneuploidy results reflect the true fetal karyotype, and some are explained by other factors, such as other fetal or maternal chromosomal abnormalities or maternal disease.

This information will help providers with post‐test counseling for these rare and unusual results.