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

Current status and future of genomics in fetal and maternal medicine: A scientific review commissioned by European Board and College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG)

This EBCOG guidance reviews the current and future status of genomics within fetal and maternal medicine. This document addresses the clinical uses of genetic testing in both screening and diagnostic testing prenatally. The role of genomics within fetal and maternal medicine is described. The research and future implications of genetic testing as well as the educational, ethical and economic implications of genomics are discussed.

Women's preferences for NIPT as a first-line test in England and France: Challenges for genetic counseling practices

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is provided in the private and public sectors worldwide as a first- or second-tier test. In England and France, NIPT is fully funded and offered as a contingent strategy with different probability cut-offs (1:150 and 1:1000). These different approaches to define the target population for NIPT have implications for how women experience their antenatal care. The paper explores and compares the perceptions and difficulties of women in England and France who took NIPT as a second-tier screening test. It is based on a semi-structured qualitative interview study with 17 women in England and France conducted between September 2021 and May 2022. The interviews were cross-analyzed using thematic analysis. Our findings show that most women express a preference for the offer of NIPT as a first-line screening test. Some issues with the contingent model, related to the access to information and termination of pregnancy (TOP), the disparities of NIPT uptake, and risks of generating anxiety with combined first-trimester screening (cFTS), could be addressed by a universal strategy for T21, T13, and T18. Nevertheless, this strategy could present some challenges for genetic counseling due to: women's understanding and expectations of NIPT; adequate information and counseling about the scope and limits of NIPT; concerns about the routinization of NIPT in the first-line offer; limitations and uncertainties associated with the provision of expanded NIPT in France; the remaining importance of other screening tests; and associated costs.

A good screening test: not just high sensitivity

Linked article: This Correspondence comments on Maya et al. Click here to view the article.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening Strategies Involving Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomy 21

Introduction

In accordance with social development, the proportion of advanced maternal age (AMA) increased and the cost of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) decreased.

Objective

We aimed to investigate the benefits and cost-effectiveness of NIPT as primary or contingent strategies limited to the high-risk population of trisomy 21 (T21).

Methods

Referring to parameters from publications or on-site verification, a theoretical model involving 1,000,000 single pregnancies was established. We presented five screening scenarios, primary NIPT (Strategy 1), contingent NIPT after traditional triple serum screening higher than 1/300 or 1/1,000 (Strategy 2-1 or 2-2), and age-based Strategy 3. Strategy 3 was stratified, with the following options: (1) for advanced maternal age (AMA) of 40 years and more, diagnostic testing was offered, (2) for AMA of 35-39 years, NIPT was introduced, (3) if younger than 35 years of age, contingent NIPT with risk higher than 1:300 (Strategy 3-1) or 1:1,000 (Strategy 3-2) will be offered. The primary outcome was an incremental cost analysis on the baseline and alternative assumptions, taking aging society, NIPT price, and compliance into consideration. The strategy was "appropriate" when the incremental cost was less than the cost of raising one T21 child (0.215 million US$). The second outcome included total cost, cost-effect, cost-benefit analysis, and screening efficiency.

Results

Strategy1 was costly, while detecting most T21. Strategy 2-1 reduced unnecessary prenatal diagnosis (PD) and was optimal in total cost, cost-effect, and cost-benefit analysis, nevertheless, T21 detection was the least. Strategy 3 induced most of the PD procedures. Then, setting Strategy2-1 as a baseline for incremental cost analysis, Strategy 3-1 was appropriate. In sensitivity analysis, when the NIPT price was lower than 47 US$, Strategy 1 was the most appropriate. In a society with more than 20% of people older than 35 years of age, the incremental cost of Strategy 3-2 was proper.

Conclusion

Combined strategies involving NIPT reduced unnecessary diagnostic tests. The AMA proportion and NIPT price played critical roles in the strategic decision. The age-based strategy was optimal in incremental cost analysis and was presented to be prominent as AMA proportion and NIPT acceptance increased. The primary NIPT was the most effective, but only at a certain price, it became the most cost-effective strategy.

Utility of fetal facial markers on a second trimester genetic sonogram in screening for Down syndrome in a high-risk Thai population

Background

To establish the reference ranges and evaluate the efficacy of the fetal facial sonomarkers prenasal thickness (PT), nasal bone length (NBL), PT/NBL ratio and NBL/PT ratio for Down syndrome screening in the second trimester of high-risk pregnancies using two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound.

Methods

A prospective study was done in Thai pregnant women at high risk for structural and chromosomal abnormalities between May 2018 and May 2019. The main exclusion criteria were any fetal anatomical anomaly detected on ultrasonography or postpartum examination, abnormal chromosome or syndrome other than Down syndrome. Ultrasounds were performed in 375 pregnant women at 14 to 22 weeks’ gestation and the fetal facial parameters were analyzed. Down syndrome results were confirmed by karyotyping. The reference ranges of these facial ultrasound markers were constructed based on the data of our population. The Down syndrome screening performance using these facial ultrasound markers was evaluated.

Results

In total, 340 euploid fetuses and 11 fetuses with Down syndrome met the inclusion criteria. The PT, NBL, and PT/NBL ratios in the euploid fetuses gradually increased with gestation progression while the NBL/PT ratio gradually decreased between 14–22 weeks’ gestation. The NBL, PT/NBL ratio, and NBL/PT ratio all had 100% sensitivity and PT had 91% sensitivity. These facial markers had 100% negative predictive value for Down syndrome screening in the second trimester. The Bland–Altman analysis showed the intra- and inter-observer variations of PT and NBL had high intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) in both operators, with ICCs of 0.98 and 0.99 and inter-observer ICCs of 0.99 for both operators.

Conclusion

The facial ultrasound markers are very useful for second trimester Down syndrome screening in our population. These facial ultrasound markers were easily identifiable and highly consistent either intra- or inter-operator by using widely-available 2D ultrasound. However, the reference ranges for these markers need to be constructed based on individual populations.

Trial registration

Registration number: REC 61–029-12–3. Date of registration: 18 May 2018.

Introducing the non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of Down syndrome in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the health economic value of a non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) strategy against a second-trimester triple screening (STS) strategy for the detection of Down syndrome based on real-world data from China.

DESIGN

A decision-analytical model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of five strategies from a societal perspective. Cost and probability input data were obtained from the real-world surveys and published sources.

SETTING

China.

PARTICIPANTS

Women with a singleton pregnancy.

INTERVENTIONS

The five strategies for screening were: (A) maternal age with STS (no NIPT); (B) STS plus NIPT screening; (C) age-STS plus NIPT screening (the currently referral strategy in China); (D) maternal age with NIPT screening and (E) universal NIPT screening.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per additional Down syndrome case terminated, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were obtained.

RESULTS

Strategy A detected the least number of Down syndrome cases. Compared with the cheapest Strategy B, Strategy D had the lowest ICER (incremental cost, US$98 944.85 per additional Down syndrome case detected). Strategy D had the highest probability of being cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay level between US$110 000.00 and US$535 000.00 per additional Down syndrome case averted. Strategy E would not be cost-effective unless the unit cost of the NIPT could be decreased to US$60.50.

CONCLUSION

Introducing NIPT screening strategies was beneficial over the use of STS strategy alone. Evaluating maternal age in combination with the NIPT screening strategy performs better than China's currently referral strategy in terms of cost-effectiveness and safety. Lowering the price of NIPT and optimising payment methods are effective measures to promote universal NIPT strategies in China.

First-trimester screening based on cell-free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience

OBJECTIVE

To compare women's experience of first-trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.

METHODS

This was single-center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first-trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first-trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown-rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP-A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first-trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray-based assay of non-polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre-test and post-test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post-test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post-test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre-test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post-test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre-test questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

First-trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first-trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, and biochemistry.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04077060.

Should pregnant women be charged for non-invasive prenatal screening? Implications for reproductive autonomy and equal access

The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in healthcare systems around the world offers an opportunity to reconsider funding policies for prenatal screening. In some countries with universal access healthcare systems, pregnant women and their partners are asked to (co)pay for NIPT. In this paper, we discuss two important rationales for charging women for NIPT: (1) to prevent increased uptake of NIPT and (2) to promote informed choice. First, given the aim of prenatal screening (reproductive autonomy), high or low uptake rates are not intrinsically desirable or undesirable. Using funding policies to negatively affect uptake, however, is at odds with the aim of screening. Furthermore, copayment disproportionally affects those of lower socioeconomic status, which conflicts with justice requirements and impedes equal access to prenatal screening. Second, we argue that although payment models may influence pregnant women's choice behaviours and perceptions of the relevance of NIPT, the copayment requirement does not necessarily lead to better-informed choices. On the contrary, external (ie, financial) influences on women's personal choices for or against prenatal screening should ideally be avoided. To improve informed decision-making, healthcare systems should instead invest in adequate non-directive, value-focused pretest counselling. This paper concludes that requiring (substantial) copayments for NIPT in universal access healthcare systems fails to promote reproductive autonomy and is unfair.

Non-invasive cell-free fetal DNA testing for aneuploidy: multicenter study of 31 515 singleton pregnancies in southeastern China

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy results of 31 515 singleton pregnancies in Fujian province, southeastern China, and assess its performance in low-, moderate- and high-risk pregnancies.

METHODS

Women were categorized into groups according to whether their risk for fetal abnormality was low, moderate or high. Cell-free plasma DNA extracted from peripheral blood samples was subjected to low-coverage whole-genome sequencing. Standard Z-score analysis of the mapped sequencing reads was used to identify fetal aneuploidy, including the three main trisomies (T21, T18 and T13) and sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA). NIPT-positive results were confirmed by amniocentesis and karyotyping. The performance of NIPT for detection of T21, T18, T13 and SCA was assessed by calculating the sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

The rate of chromosomal abnormality detected by NIPT in the study population was 1.38%. A higher rate of chromosomal abnormality was found in the high-risk group (1.57%) compared to the moderate-risk (1.05%) and low-risk (1.18%) groups (P < 0.05). Sensitivity and specificity, respectively, were 98.96% (95/96) and 99.94% (31 274/31 292) for detection of T21, 100% (25/25) and 99.96% (31 352/31 363) for T18, 100% (7/7) and 99.97% (31 373/31 381) for T13 and 100% (61/61) and 99.74% (31 245/31 327) for SCA. Positive predictive values were high for T21 (84.07%) and T18 (69.44%) and moderate for T13 (46.67%) and SCA (42.66%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the application of NIPT for reliable and accurate testing of the general population of reproductive-age women for clinically significant fetal aneuploidy. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

First-trimester screening-biomarkers and cell-free DNA

Background: The introduction of cell-free DNA into clinical practice has changed the screening approach. Healthcare professionals and future parents tend to overestimate NIPT (noninvasive prenatal testing) capabilities despite its relatively high cost and limited information.Objective: In this review, our aim was to survey how various countries have introduced contingent screening models and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the combined screening test and the use of NIPT.Data source: The Web of Science, PubMed database and institutional websites were searched for information regarding screening approaches and the implementation in different countries.Results: There are nine countries and regions that have already approved contingent screening test, while others (e.g. Australia) are discussing the implementation of contingent screening versus universal use of NIPT. There are several recent meta-analyses debating whether to use NIPT for universal screening for trisomies and other fetal conditions.Conclusions: NIPT is a reasonable option as an advanced screening test for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 only. Introducing screening by NIPT instead of a first-trimester screening will cause the loss of other valuable information including accurate dating of pregnancy, diagnosing major structural fetal abnormalities and multiple pregnancies at an early gestational age. Additionally, the opportunity to screen for early preeclampsia will be lost. Currently, the price for NIPT is still high adding extra strain on publicly funded health systems.

Cost-effectiveness of prenatal screening and diagnostic strategies for Down syndrome: A microsimulation modeling analysis

Objectives

Down syndrome (DS) is the most frequently occurring fetal chromosomal abnormality and different prenatal screening strategies are used for determining risk of DS worldwide. New non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), which uses cell-free fetal DNA in maternal blood can provide benefits due to its higher sensitivity and specificity in comparison to conventional screening tests. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of using population-level NIPT in fetal aneuploidy screening for DS.

Methods

We developed a microsimulation decision-analytic model to perform a probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of prenatal screening and diagnostic strategies for DS. The model followed individual simulated pregnant women through the pregnancy pathway. The comparators were serum-only screening, contingent NIPT (i.e., NIPT as a second-tier screening test) and universal NIPT (i.e., NIPT as a first-tier screening test). To address uncertainty around the model parameters, the expected values of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in the base case and all scenario analyses were obtained through probabilistic analysis from a Monte Carlo simulation.

Results

Base case and scenario analyses were conducted by repeating the micro-simulation 1,000 times for a sample of 45,605 pregnant women per the population of British Columbia, Canada (N = 4.8 million). Preliminary results of the sequential CEAs showed that contingent NIPT was a dominant strategy compared to serum-only screening. Compared with contingent NIPT, universal NIPT at the current test price was not cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over $100,000/QALY. Contingent NIPT also had the lowest cost per DS case detected among these three strategies.

Conclusion

Including NIPT in existing prenatal screening for DS is shown to be beneficial over conventional testing. However, at current prices, implementation of NIPT as a second-tier screening test is more cost-effective than deploying it as a universal test.

The role of information provision in economic evaluations of non-invasive prenatal testing: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Technological progress has led to changes in the antenatal screening programmes, most significantly the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). The availability of a new type of testing changes the type of information that the parent(s) require before, during and after screening to mitigate anxiety about the testing process and results.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the extent to which economic evaluations of NIPT have accounted for the need to provide information alongside testing and the associated costs and health outcomes of information provision.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic evaluations of NIPTs (up to February 2018) was conducted. Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO were searched using an electronic search strategy combining a published economic search filter (from NHS economic evaluations database) with terms related to NIPT and screening-related technologies. Data were extracted using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards framework and the results were summarised as part of a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 12 economic evaluations were identified. The majority of evaluations (n = 10; 83.3%) involved cost effectiveness analysis. Only four studies (33.3%) included the cost of providing information about NIPT in their economic evaluation. Two studies considered the impact of test results on parents' quality of life by allowing utility decrements for different outcomes. Some studies suggested that the challenges of valuing information prohibited their inclusion in an economic evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Economic evaluations of NIPTs need to account for the costs and outcomes associated with information provision, otherwise estimates of cost effectiveness may prove inaccurate.

Clinical validation of a novel automated cell-free DNA screening assay for trisomies 21, 13, and 18 in maternal plasma

Objective

To evaluate clinical performance of a new automated cell‐free (cf)DNA assay in maternal plasma screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, and to determine fetal sex.

Method

Maternal plasma samples from 1200 singleton pregnancies were analyzed with a new non–sequencing cfDNA method, which is based on imaging and counting specific chromosome targets. Reference outcomes were determined by either cytogenetic testing, of amniotic fluid or chorionic villi, or clinical examination of neonates.

Results

The samples examined included 158 fetal aneuploidies. Sensitivity was 100% (112/112) for trisomy 21, 89% (32/36) for trisomy 18, and 100% (10/10) for trisomy 13. The respective specificities were 100%, 99.5%, and 99.9%. There were five first pass failures (0.4%), all in unaffected pregnancies. Sex classification was performed on 979 of the samples and 99.6% (975/979) provided a concordant result.

Conclusion

The new automated cfDNA assay has high sensitivity and specificity for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and accurate classification of fetal sex, while maintaining a low failure rate. The study demonstrated that cfDNA testing can be simplified and automated to reduce cost and thereby enabling wider population‐based screening.

What is already known about this topic?

Maternal plasma cell‐free (cf)DNA analysis with next-generation sequencing has a high sensitivity and specificity for fetal trisomy 21 and other common autosomal trisomies.

A new amplification-free, nonsequencing, and targeted cfDNA assay has been developed.

Proof‐of‐principle analysis found the new assay has promising results in screening for trisomy 21.

What does this study add?

The new assay has high sensitivity and specificity for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in singleton pregnancies.

It can accurately determine fetal sex.

It is suitable for use in biochemical screening laboratories since it is highly automated and does not require specialized personnel.

Clinical application of a contingent screening strategy for trisomies with cell-free DNA: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Different strategies have been designed for clinical implementation of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing. We aimed to evaluate the performance of a contingent strategy based on conventional screening and offering cfDNA to the intermediate-risk group, for the screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13. Secondary objectives were to assess the uptake of cfDNA in women with intermediate-risk, to evaluate the performance of cfDNA testing, and the preferences of pregnant women with intermediate risk.

METHODS

Prospective observational pilot study between February 2016 and March 2017. Singleton pregnancies with a known outcome were included in the study. At the conventional screening (first trimester combined test or second trimester quadruple test) women were classified in high (risk ≥1:250) or low risk (< 1:250). For the study, a contingent strategy was applied: following the conventional screening women were classified into three groups: high risk (risk ≥1:10 or nuchal translucency ≥3 mm), intermediate-risk (risk 1:11 to 1:1500) and low risk (< 1:1500), and a cfDNA test was offered to those at the intermediate risk.

RESULTS

For the analysis, 2639 women were included, 2422 (91.8%) had a first trimester combined test and 217 (8.2%) a second trimester quadruple test. There were 5 cases of trisomy 21, 4 of trisomy 18 and none of trisomy 13. For the contingent strategy, the detection rate and false positive rates were 88.9% (8/9) and 1.3% (35/2630), respectively. For the conventional strategy, the detection rate and false positive rates were 66.7% (6/9) and 5.3% (140/2630), respectively. The cfDNA test had a detection rate for trisomy 21 of 100% (3 out of 3), and a false positive rate of 0.2% (1/466). In a survey, 81.8% (374/457) of women in the intermediate-risk group would choose cfDNA testing as the second line test, mainly due to the lack of risk for the fetus.

CONCLUSION

A contingent screening strategy for trisomies 21, 18 and 13, based on conventional screening, and offering a cfDNA test to women with a risk between 1:11 to 1:1500, reduced the false positive rate and increased the detection rate for these trisomies. Moreover, this strategy is well accepted by women.

Impact of cell-free fetal DNA on invasive prenatal diagnostic tests in a real-world public setting

Objective To evaluate the impact of cell-free fetal DNA (cfDNA) test on the number of invasive tests carried out in a public hospital that does not include this test in its services. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study in singleton pregnancies with a high risk (>1:270) on the first-trimester screening for aneuploidies. The options of performing an invasive test or a cfDNA test were explained to all women, the latter being especially recommended to those with a 1:50-1:270 risk (Group 1). If the risk was >1:50 (Group 2), or nuchal translucency (NT) was >99th percentile or there were major malformations (Group 3), invasive test was recommended. Results A total of 755 of 14,398 (5.2%) cases had a high-risk first-trimester screening, of whom 46 cases were excluded due to incomplete follow-up. In the remaining 709 cases, the percentage of aneuploidies was 9.9% (70 cases) and 110 opted for a cfDNA test (15.5%). There were two true-positive results of cfDNA (one in Group 2 and another in Group 3). In Group 1, 67.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60.0%-72.1%, P < 0.01] fewer invasive procedures were performed in those who opted for a cfDNA test, without having false negatives. Conclusion Pregnant women with a 1:50-1:270 risk who opt for cfDNA save two out of three invasive tests, without affecting the aneuploidy detection rate.