Cell-Free DNA-Based Non-invasive Prenatal Screening for Common Aneuploidies in a Canadian Province: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

The clinical performance of fetal sex chromosome abnormalities in serum biochemical screening in the second trimester

This study aimed to investigate the serum biochemical markers' propensity associated with sex chromosome abnormalities (SCAs) and assess the clinical efficacy of SCAs in serum biochemical screening during the second trimester. A retrospective case-control analysis was conducted on pregnant women who underwent serum biochemical screening during the second trimester. The study compared groups of women with SCAs to those with normal chromosome karyotypes to assess changes in biochemical markers. We analysed and compared the performance of serum biochemical screening in each SCA group. The results showed that the alterations in serum biochemical markers varied among the different SCA groups. Typically, the serum biochemical markers of fetal SCAs were either above the 95th percentile or below the 5th percentile. The proportions of high- and intermediate-risk findings for 45,X, 47,XXX, 47,XXY, 47,XYY, and mosaic sex chromosomal abnormalities were 43.48%, 78.95%, 63.89%, 70.59%, and 78.13%, respectively. Besides detecting fetal trisomy 21 and trisomy 18, the current contingent screening procedures may also accidentally identify various fetal SCAs at a rate of 69.18%.

Guideline No. 456: Prenatal Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Anomalies

OBJECTIVE

To review the available prenatal aneuploidy screening options and to provide updated clinical guidelines for reproductive care providers.

TARGET POPULATION

All pregnant persons receiving counselling and providing informed consent for prenatal screening.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline should increase clinician competency to offer counselling for prenatal screening options and provide appropriate interventions. Given the variety of available options for prenatal screening with different performance, cost, and availability across Canada, appropriate counselling is of paramount importance to offer the best individual choice to Canadian pregnant persons. Prenatal screening may cause anxiety, and the decisions about prenatal diagnostic procedures are complex given the potential risk of fetal loss.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library in and prior to July 2023, using an appropriate controlled vocabulary (prenatal diagnosis, amniocentesis, chorionic villi sampling, non-invasive prenatal screening) and key words (prenatal screening, prenatal genetic counselling). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English and published from January 1995 to July 2023.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Health care providers involved in prenatal screening, including general practitioners, obstetricians, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, geneticists, and radiologists.

SOCIAL MEDIA ABSTRACT

Non-invasive prenatal screening is the most accurate method for detecting major aneuploidies. It is not universally available in the public health system and has some limitations.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Impact of Structural Differences on the Modeled Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) was developed to improve the accuracy of prenatal screening to detect chromosomal abnormalities. Published economic analyses have yielded different incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs), leading to conclusions of NIPT being dominant, cost-effective, and cost-ineffective. These analyses have used different model structures, and the extent to which these structural variations have contributed to differences in ICERs is unclear.

AIM

To assess the impact of different model structures on the cost-effectiveness of NIPT for the detection of trisomy 21 (T21; Down syndrome).

METHODS

A systematic review identified economic models comparing NIPT to conventional screening. The key variations in identified model structures were the number of health states and modeling approach. New models with different structures were developed in TreeAge and populated with consistent parameters to enable a comparison of the impact of selected structural variations on results.

RESULTS

The review identified 34 economic models. Based on these findings, demonstration models were developed: 1) a decision tree with 3 health states, 2) a decision tree with 5 health states, 3) a microsimulation with 3 health states, and 4) a microsimulation with 5 health states. The base-case ICER from each model was 1) USD$34,474 (2023)/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 2) USD$14,990 (2023)/QALY, (3) USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY, and (4) NIPT was dominated.

CONCLUSION

Model-structuring choices can have a large impact on the ICER and conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness, which may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding for NIPT. The use of reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.

HIGHLIGHTS

NIPT is a clinical area in which a variety of modeling approaches have been published, with wide variation in reported cost-effectiveness.This study shows that when broader contextual factors are held constant, varying the model structure yields results that range from NIPT being less effective and more expensive than conventional screening (i.e., NIPT was dominated) through to NIPT being more effective and more expensive than conventional screening with an ICER of USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY.Model-structuring choices may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding of NIPT. Reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.

Non-invasive cell-free DNA prenatal screening for trisomy 21 as part of primary screening strategy in twin pregnancy

OBJECTIVES

The performance of non-invasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood in twin pregnancy is underevaluated, while serum marker-based strategies yield poor results. This study aimed to assess the performance of non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancy as a first-tier test. Secondary objectives were to assess its failure rate and factors associated with failure.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included twin pregnancies in which non-invasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA was performed as the primary screening strategy between May 2017 and October 2019. We used the NIPT VeriSeq® test for in-vitro diagnosis and set a fetal fraction cut-off of 4% for monochorionic pregnancies and 8% for dichorionic ones. Clinical data and pregnancy outcome were collected from physicians or midwives via a questionnaire or were retrieved directly on-site. We calculated the performance of non-invasive cell-free DNA screening for trisomy 21, analyzed its failure rate and assessed potentially associated factors.

RESULTS

Among 1885 twin pregnancies with follow-up, there were six (0.32%) confirmed cases of trisomy 21. The sensitivity of non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21 was 100% (95% CI, 54.1-100%) and the false-positive rate was 0.23% (95% CI, 0.06-0.59%). The primary failure rate was 4.6%, with 4.0% being due to insufficient fetal fraction. A successful result was obtained for 65.4% of women who underwent a new blood draw, reducing the overall failure rate to 2.8%. Maternal body mass index, gestational age at screening as well as chorionicity were significantly associated with the risk of failure.

CONCLUSION

This study provides further evidence of the high performance, at an extremely low false-positive rate, of non-invasive prenatal screening in twins as part of a primary screening strategy for trisomy 21. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation

Background

Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders.

Objectives

(1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies.

Design

Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work.

Systematic review methods

We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework.

Qualitative methods

We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening.

Results

The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence.

Limitations

Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews.

Conclusions

There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Expansion of non-invasive prenatal screening to the screening of 10 types of chromosomal anomalies: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the cost-effectiveness of the addition of chromosomal anomalies detectable by non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS), in a prenatal screening programme targeting common aneuploidies.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A simulation study was conducted to study the addition of chromosomal anomalies detectable by NIPS (sex chromosome aneuploidies, 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, large deletion/duplication >7 Mb and rare autosomal trisomies) to five basic strategies currently aiming the common trisomies: three strategies currently offered by the public healthcare systems in Canada, whose first-tier test is performed with biochemical markers, and two programmes whose first-tier test consists of NIPS-based methods.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The total number of cases of chromosomal anomalies detected and the costs related to the consumption of medical services.

RESULTS

The most effective and the most cost-effective option in almost all prenatal screening strategies is the option that includes all targeted additional conditions. In the strategies where NIPS is used as first-tier testing, the cost per additional case detected by adding all possible additional anomalies to a programme that currently targets only common trisomies is $C25 710 (95% CI $C25 489 to $C25 934) for massively parallel shotgun sequencing and $C57 711 (95% CI $C57 141 to $C58 292) for targeted massively parallel sequencing, respectively. The acceptability curves show that at a willingness-to-pay of $C50 000 per one additional case detected, the expansion of NIPS-based methods for the detection of all possible additional conditions has a 90% probability of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

From an economic perspective, in strategies that use NIPS as a first-tier screening test, expanding the programmes to detect any considered chromosomal anomalies other than the three common trisomies would be cost-effective. However, the potential expansion of prenatal screening programmes also requires consideration of societal issues, including ethical ones.

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT): Reliability, Challenges, and Future Directions

Non-invasive prenatal testing was first discovered in 1988; it was primarily thought to be able to detect common aneuploidies, such as Patau syndrome (T13), Edward Syndrome (T18), and Down syndrome (T21). It comprises a simple technique involving the analysis of cell-free foetal DNA (cffDNA) obtained through maternal serum, using advances in next-generation sequencing. NIPT has shown promise as a simple and low-risk screening test, leading various governments and private organizations worldwide to dedicate significant resources towards its integration into national healthcare initiatives as well as the formation of consortia and research studies aimed at standardizing its implementation. This article aims to review the reliability of NIPT while discussing the current challenges prevalent among different communities worldwide.

Position statement from the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis on the use of non-invasive prenatal testing for the detection of fetal chromosomal conditions in singleton pregnancies

What is already known about this topic?

What does this study add?

The Emergence and Global Spread of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

Since its introduction in 2011, noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has spread rapidly around the world. It carries numerous benefits but also raises challenges, often related to sociocultural, legal, and economic contexts. This article describes the implementation of NIPT in nine countries, each with its own unique characteristics: Australia, Canada, China and Hong Kong, India, Israel, Lebanon, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Themes covered for each country include the structure of the healthcare system, how NIPT is offered, counseling needs and resources, and cultural and legal context regarding disability and pregnancytermination. Some common issues emerge, including cost as a barrier to equitable access, the complexity of decision-making about public funding, and a shortage of appropriate resources that promote informed choice. Conversely, sociocultural values that underlie the use of NIPT vary greatly among countries. The issues described will become even more challenging as NIPT evolves from a second-tier to a first-tier screening test with expanded use.

A Retrospective Analysis Of Different Contingent Screening Models For Fetal Down Syndrome In Southwestern China

To discuss combinations of traditional screening and noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) and to compare which traditional screening is the most suitable first-line screening approach to NIPS, pregnant women were recruited in this retrospective observational study. Pregnant women underwent one of four traditional screening tests. The 9 contingent models were combined by high risk cut-offs of 1:50, 1:100, 1:270 and intermediate risk cut-offs of 1:1000, 1:1500, 1:2000. We analyzed cost and performance of various screening models with contingent screening of different risk cut-offs. Compared with other screening tests, combined first-trimester screening (CFTS) had the lowest proportion of high risk (≥1:270) with the highest detection rate (DR) (78.79%) and the lowest proportion of intermediate risk (1:271~1:1000). When intermediate risk was 1:51 ~1:1500, CFTS as first-line screening had the lowest cost with DR of 93.94%. Other screening tests as the first-line screening with intermediate risk of 1:51~1:1000 had the lowest cost, there DR were 90.91%, 84.62%, 91.67%, respectively. Our study demonstrated if only one traditional screening was allowed to screen pregnant women, CFTS was recommended as the first choice. According to local health and economic conditions, adopting appropriate traditional screening with suitable cut-offs as first-line screening will contributed to a cost-effective screening model.

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.

Allocating healthcare resources to genomic testing in Canada: latest evidence and current challenges

Precision medicine (PM) informed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) poses challenges for health technology assessment (HTA). To date, there has been limited reimbursement of genomic testing with NGS in Canada, particularly for whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing (WGS/WES). Through a structured literature review, we examine Canadian economic evidence and evidentiary challenges for the adoption of genomic testing. We searched Medline (PubMed) for published Canadian studies generating economic evidence for PM informed by NGS. Our search focused on studies examining the costs and/or value of NGS. We reviewed included studies and summarized results according to evaluation type, clinical context, NGS technology, and test strategy. We then grouped HTA challenges encountered by authors when evaluating NGS. Our review included twenty-five studies. To determine the economic impacts of NGS-informed PM in Canada, studies applied cost-effectiveness analysis (52%, n = 13), stated preference analysis (20%, n = 5), cost-consequence analysis (16%, n = 4), and healthcare resource utilization or costing analysis (12%, n = 3). NGS panels were the most common technology evaluated (n = 13), followed by WGS and/or WES (n = 8). The included studies highlighted multiple challenges when generating economic evidence, many of which remain unaddressed. Challenges were broadly related to (1) accounting for all NGS outcomes; (2) addressing uncertainty; and (3) improving consistency of economic approaches. Canadian studies are beginning to produce estimates of the economic impacts of NGS-informed PM, yet challenges for HTA remain. While solutions and real-world evidence are generated, lifecycle health technology management methods can be designed to better support resource allocation decisions for genomic testing in Canada.

The value of non-invasive prenatal testing: preferences of Canadian pregnant women, their partners, and health professionals regarding NIPT use and access

Background

Canadian policies regarding the implementation and public coverage of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) are heterogeneous and shifting, with NIPT being publicly covered for high-risk pregnancies in some provinces, but not others. Such a diverse and evolving policy landscape provides fertile ground for examining the preferences of pregnant women, their partners, and health professionals regarding the implementation and coverage of NIPT by the public healthcare system, as well as the factors influencing their preferences, which is what the present study does.

Methods

In this paper, we report the results of three-large scale Canadian surveys, in which 882 pregnant women, 395 partners of pregnant women, and 184 healthcare professionals participated.

Results

The paper focuses on preferences regarding how and when NIPT should be used, as well as the factors influencing these preferences, and how coverage for NIPT should be provided. These are correlated with respondents’ levels of knowledge about Down syndrome and testing technologies and with their stated intended use of NIPT results.

Conclusion

Salient is the marked difference between the preferences of prospective parents and those of healthcare professionals, which has potential implications for Canadian policy regarding NIPT implementation and insurance coverage.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2153-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Adopting Noninvasive Prenatal Testing as a Primary Screening Method for Fetal Aneuploidies in the General Pregnancy Population

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and economic impact of adopting noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using circulating cell-free DNA as a first-line screening method for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in the general pregnancy population.

METHODS

A decision-analytical model was developed to assess the impact of adopting NIPT as a primary screening test compared to conventional screening methods. The model takes the Belgium perspective and includes only the direct medical cost of screening, diagnosis, and procedure-related complications. NIPT costs are EUR 260. Clinical outcomes and the cost per trisomy detected were assessed. Sensitivity analysis measured the impact of NIPT false-positive rate (FPR) on modelled results.

RESULTS

The cost per trisomy detected was EUR 63,016 for conventional screening versus EUR 66,633 for NIPT, with a difference of EUR 3,617. NIPT reduced unnecessary invasive tests by 94.8%, decreased procedure-related miscarriages by 90.8%, and increased trisomies detected by 29.1%. Increasing the FPR of NIPT (from < 0.01 to 1.0%) increased the average number of invasive procedures required to diagnose a trisomy from 2.2 to 4.5, respectively.

CONCLUSION

NIPT first-line screening at a reasonable cost is cost-effective and provides better clinical outcomes. However, modelled results are dependent on the adoption of an NIPT with a low FPR.

Reconciling ethical and economic conceptions of value in health policy using the capabilities approach: A qualitative investigation of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing

When evaluating new morally complex health technologies, policy decision-makers consider a broad range of different evaluations, which may include the technology's clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and social or ethical implications. This type of holistic assessment is challenging, because each of these evaluations may be grounded in different and potentially contradictory assumptions about the technology's value. One such technology where evaluations conflict is Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). Cost-effectiveness evaluations of NIPT often assess NIPT's ability to deliver on goals (i.e preventing the birth of children with disabilities) that social and ethical analyses suggest it should not have. Thus, cost effectiveness analyses frequently contradict social and ethical assessments of NIPT's value. We use the case of NIPT to explore how economic evaluations using a capabilities approach may be able to capture a broader, more ethical view of the value of NIPT. The capabilities approach is an evaluative framework which bases wellbeing assessments on a person's abilities, rather than their expressed preferences. It is linked to extra-welfarist approaches in health economic assessment. Beginning with Nussbaum's capability framework, we conducted a directed qualitative content analysis of interview data collected in 2014 from 27 Canadian women with personal experience of NIPT. We found that eight of Nussbaum's ten capabilities related to options, states, or choices that women valued in the context of NIPT, and identified one new capability. Our findings suggest that women value NIPT for its ability to provide more and different choices in the prenatal care pathway, and that a capabilities approach can indeed capture the value of NIPT in a way that goes beyond measuring health outcomes of ambiguous social and ethical value. More broadly, the capabilities approach may serve to resolve contradictions between ethical and economic evaluations of health technologies, and contribute to extra-welfarist approaches in the assessment of morally complex health technologies.