Advanced first trimester screening (AFS): an improved test strategy for the individual risk assessment of fetal aneuploidies and malformations

Missed Down Syndrome Cases after First Trimester False-Negative Screening-Lessons to be Learned

Background and Objectives: Here, we performed a descriptive analysis of Down syndrome (DS) cases that were misdiagnosed and/or false-negative diagnosed after first trimester traditional screening via risk evaluation using ultrasound, biochemical markers, and different software programs. Our objective was to demonstrate the clear need to improve the application of prenatal DS screening programs using standardized ultrasound measurements, accurate pregnancy dating, analytical immunoassay performance, and properly selected medians. Materials and Methods: We performed a database search for the period 2010–2015 to analyze DS cases that were false-negative diagnosed after the first trimester of pregnancy, before the introduction of cell free fetal DNA-based tests by Romanian laboratories in 2015. First-trimester screening was performed using two software programs for prenatal DS risk calculation: Astraia and Prisca. The rationale for using both software programs was to assess the full risk using the maternal age combined test (based on nuchal translucency thickness, nasal bone, ductus venosus flow, tricuspid flow, free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin level, and serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A) and, in some cases, the triple test. Results: We identified seven DS cases that exhibited low risk for trisomy 21, and 6540 cases with a low risk for trisomy 21 and euploid fetus in the first trimester. Using Astraia software, 14 cases were diagnosed, and three cases were missed after risk calculation. Using Prisca software, four cases were missed. Additionally, one neonate had a missed prenatal diagnosis of atrio-ventricular canal defect. Conclusion: In Romania, the evaluation of DS risk depends on patient choice (without knowing the accuracy of the utilized tests) and on the operators’ skills. Both Astraia and Prisca software were developed by experts, who can prove their performance in DS screening. However, even in an ideal situation, false-negative results are possible. The application of first and second-trimester combined screening based on biochemical markers could be improved by the implementation of standardized protocols, professional guidelines for test application, and audit control.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

The introduction of the absolute risk for the detection of fetal aneuploidies in the first-trimester screening

PURPOSE

Maternal age is a crucial factor in fetal aneuploidy screening, resulting in an increased rate of false-positive cases in older women and false-negative cases in younger women. The absolute risk (AR) is the simplest way to eliminate the background maternal age risk, as it represents the amount of improvement of the combined risk from the maternal background risk. The aim of this work is to assess the performance of the AR in the combined first-trimester screening for aneuploidies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective validation of the AR in the combined first-trimester screening for fetal aneuploidies, in an unselected population at Altamedica Fetal-Maternal Medical Center in Rome, between March 2007 and December 2008.

RESULTS

Of 3845 women included in the study, we had a complete follow-up on 2984. We evaluated that an AR < 3 would individuate 22 of 23 cases of aneuploidy with a detection rate of 95.7% (95%CI 87.3-100), a false-positive rate of 8.7% (95%CI 7.7-9.7) and a false-negative rate of 4.3% (95%CI 0-12.7).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, the AR ameliorates the detection rate for aneuploidy. Further research and a prospective study on a larger population would help us to improve the AR in detecting most cases of aneuploidy.

First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Analysis of the impact of PAPP-A, free β-hCG and nuchal translucency thickness on the advanced first trimester screening

OBJECTIVES

The intention of this study is to analyze the impact of the single parameters NT, PAPP-A and free β-hCG used in combined first trimester screening and to determine their contribution in the risk assessment.

METHODS

A retrospective risk assessment on the advanced first trimester screening (AFS) algorithm was made to determine the effect of a particular parameter while the remaining ones were fixed for calculation. Afterward data were recalculated by the AFS module. Test performance was measured by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and their area under curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Among the 14,862 cases are 14,748 healthy fetuses, 86 with trisomy 21, 22 with trisomy 18 and 6 with trisomy 13. Some settings obtain at default cut-off a very high sensitivity. However, a lack of specificity, as a high false-positive rate, too. The ROC analysis was best for NT, followed by PAPP-A. Free β-hCG showed the lowest AUC. Combining PAPP-A and free β-hCG offered a better AUC than each parameter alone. Best test performance was obtained by including all three parameters.

DISCUSSION

A detection rate of 69 % for testing NT discretely is in order with present study data. PAPP-A is following and free β-hCG is not useful with a test positive rate of about a third. The detection rate of the biochemical parameters combined is higher than for NT alone, but results in a five times higher punctuation rate. All parameters together in the AFS provide the best test performance. The impact of each parameter NT, PAPP-A and free-β-hCG in a combined test strategy is nearly a third. Thus, every single parameter is needed to provide a high detection rate for all of the trisomies and minimize the number of unnecessary invasive diagnostics.

Aneuploidy screening during pregnancy by a three-dimensional Advanced First Trimester Screening model: description of the AFS-3D algorithm

BACKGROUND

A novel screening method for fetal aneuploidies was developed, in which nuchal translucency (NT), pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A), and free-β human chorionic gonadotropin (free-β hCG) are placed into a three-dimensional scatter plot. Likelihood ratios are directly inferred from the ratio of already observed healthy and diseased fetuses. This method is called 'Three-dimensional Advanced First trimester Screening' (AFS-3D). It was aimed to develop and test a new algorithm based on the results of previous studies.

METHODS

A new static-sized sphere model was developed. Several scaling factors of the axes and the optional application of the modifications 'simulation' (SIM) and 'empty sphere positive' were tested on 15,227 data sets. An additional examination was performed on a second collective (n = 458).

RESULTS

The application of the new AFS-3D model with static-sized spheres, a re-sampled ∆NT axis by a scaling factor of 0.125, and the application of SIM and Empty Box Positive resulted in a marked improvement of the test performance (area under curve, AUC = 0.9668). Analogous results (AUC = 0.9807) were found for the second test collective.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel approach is promising and should be tested on a larger, independent collective.

Impact of the maternal age-related risk in first-trimester combined screening for trisomy 21

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of the maternal age-related risk in first-trimester combined screening for trisomy 21.

METHODS

Prospective assessment of risk for trisomy 21 by a combination of maternal age, fetal NT thickness and maternal serum PAPP-A and free β-hCG at 11+0 to 13+6 weeks of gestation between April 2002 and February 2007. Screening for trisomy 21 by patient-specific risks based on the maternal and gestational age-related risk multiplied by a likelihood ratio for NT and for maternal serum biochemistry were compared with a screening policy that is only based on the combined likelihood ratio for fetal NT and maternal serum biochemistry.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 38,603 euploid pregnancies and 109 fetuses with trisomy 21. In screening for trisomy 21 by fetal NT and maternal serum biochemistry in combination with and without maternal age with a fixed false-positive rate of 3%, the detection rate was 82.6 and 79.8%, respectively. In the group of women with a maternal age of less than 30 years and between 30 and 35 years, there was no difference in the detection rate. For women with a maternal age of 35 years or older, the detection rate increased from 77.1% without maternal age to 94.3% with maternal age, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The overall difference between first-trimester screening based on fetal NT and maternal serum biochemistry with and without maternal age is about 3%. In screening with a fixed cut-off, the maternal age-related risk keeps the false-positive rate low in younger women and increases the detection rate in older women.

Is the yolk sac a new marker for chromosomal abnormalities in early pregnancy?

INTRODUCTION

Abnormal yolk sac size is associated with fetal miscarriage. This is a case report of two pregnancies with abnormal yolk sacs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In one case, a twofold sac was found; in the other case, the yolk sac was not of spherical form.

CONCLUSION

Currently available publications demonstrate a correlation between abnormal yolk sac size and miscarriage. However, in both cases a trisomy was confirmed. It should therefore be discussed whether form and size of the yolk sac could be a marker for chromosomal abnormalities of the fetus.

Improved prenatal aneuploidy screening using the novel advanced first-trimester screening algorithm: a multicenter study of 10,017 pregnancies

PURPOSE

: It has been postulated that the maternal age component should be completely excluded from first-trimester screening (FTS) for fetal aneuploidies. In this study, we tested a new algorithm known as advanced first-trimester screening (AFS), which disregards maternal age.

METHOD

: In a multicenter study, FTS findings were retrieved from 10,017 pregnancies. FTS risk assessment was performed using the Nicolaides method, and the AFS score was calculated. The results of both methods were compared.

RESULTS

: Within this population, 81 fetuses had an abnormal karyotype. The sensitivity of the 2 algorithms was 86.4%. When the AFS method was used, the positive predictive value rose from 9.6% (FTS) to 12.4% (AFS). Using AFS, the test positive rate could be decreased by 161 cases (-22.2%) (p < 0.0001), due to a reduction of false positive cases. As a result, the false positive rate of AFS was 24.5% lower than that of FTS, while the same number of aneuploidies was detected.

CONCLUSION

: AFS can markedly reduce the rate of false positive test results. If these results are confirmed by larger multicenter studies, the new AFS will represent a great improvement in fetal aneuploidy screening. (c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound, 2008.

Proteomic profile determination of autosomal aneuploidies by mass spectrometry on amniotic fluids

BACKGROUND

Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities by cytogenetic analysis is time-consuming, expensive, and requires highly qualified technicians. Rapid diagnosis of aneuploidies followed by reassurance of women with normal results can be performed by molecular analysis of uncultured foetal cells. In the present study, we developed a proteomic fingerprinting approach coupled with a statistical classification method to improve diagnosis of aneuploidies, including trisomies 13, 18, and 21, in amniotic fluid samples.

RESULTS

The proteomic spectra obtained from 52 pregnant women were compiled, normalized, and mass peaks with mass-to-charge ratios between 2.5 and 50 kDa identified. Peak information was combined together and analysed using univariate statistics. Among the 208 expressed protein peaks, 40 differed significantly between aneuploid and non aneuploid samples, with AUC diagnostic values ranging from 0.71 to 0.91. Hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis and support vector machine (SVM) analysis were performed. Two class predictor models were defined from the training set, which resulted in a prediction accuracy of 92.3% and 96.43%, respectively. Using an external and independent validation set, diagnostic accuracies were maintained at 87.5% and 91.67%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study demonstrates the potential interest of protein expression signature in the identification of new potential biological markers that might be helpful for the rapid clinical management of high-risk pregnancies.

Are nuchal translucency, pregnancy associated plasma protein-A or free-β-human chorionic gonadotropin depending on maternal age? A multicenter study of 8,116 pregnancies

INTRODUCTION

First-trimester screening according to Nicolaides uses maternal age to obtain a common background risk for trisomy 21. The likelihood ratios by nuchal translucency, free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A are not with respect to maternal age. It was the aim of this study to investigate if likelihood ratios should better take care of it.

MATERIALS

Pearson's correlation and different models of regression analysis had been performed on the results of 8,116 first-trimester screenings. The total number of pregnancies was subdivided into three subgroups of healthy fetuses (n = 8,038); fetuses with Down's syndrome (n = 46) and fetuses with other genetic abnormalities (n = 32). Statistical testing was applied to each of the three groups.

RESULTS

Strong independence from maternal age could be found for each of the first-trimester screening measurement parameter, as well for healthy and as for affected fetuses. Neither Pearson's test nor nonlinear regression models could detect a correlation. Accordingly significance of Pearson's test is not given.

DISCUSSION

First-trimester screening would not be improved by considering the maternal age in the calculation of the likelihood ratios. Therefore the currently used algorithm is adequate. According, to the results, it seems to be proper as well to disregard the maternal age in newer test strategies advanced first-trimester screening (AFS) at all.