1
|
Nintao N, Manonai J, Wattanayingcharoenchai R, Bumrungphuet S, Hansahiranwadee W, Dulyaphat W, Somchit W, Wattanasirichaigoon D, Prakobpanich M, Tangshewinsirikul C. Effects of an animated educational video on knowledge of cell-free DNA screening among Thai pregnant women: a randomized control trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2023; 23:853. [PMID: 38082376 PMCID: PMC10714566 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-06170-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/03/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In developing countries, pregnant women have insufficient knowledge about cell-free DNA screening. Reports from developed countries have found that various tools in prenatal genetic counseling can improve the knowledge of pregnant women who undergo cell-free DNA screening. Data are limited from developing countries where women have different baseline socio-educational backgrounds. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of an animated educational video combined with traditional counseling versus traditional counseling alone in changing pregnant women's knowledge of cell-free DNA screening. METHODS This study was a randomized control trial at an antenatal clinic. Eligible subjects who were Thai pregnant women, were randomized to either view or not view the 4-minute animated educational video explaining cell-free DNA screening. Both groups received traditional counseling. The women were asked to complete a Thai questionnaire assessing knowledge of the screening before and after intervention. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: demographic data of the research participants and their existing awareness about cell-free DNA testing; performance and limitations of cell-free DNA screening; and participants' attitudes toward the positive screening. Primary outcome was the change in knowledge scores. Secondary outcomes were attitudes toward positive screening test, levels of satisfaction with counseling, and screening acceptance rates. RESULTS Data from 83 women in the video group and 82 in the non-video group were analyzed. The knowledge score (range 0-18) change after counseling was significantly higher in the video group than the non-video group (+ 7.1 ± 3.3 vs + 4.2 ± 2.5; p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in attitudes toward positive screening test (p = 0.83), levels of satisfaction (p = 0.24), or screening acceptance rates (p = 0.15) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Adding the video to traditional counseling was better than traditional counseling alone in improving pregnant women's knowledge about cell-free DNA screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study was retrospectively registered with the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20210917001, 17/09/2021).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nutta Nintao
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Jittima Manonai
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Rujira Wattanayingcharoenchai
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Sommart Bumrungphuet
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Wirada Hansahiranwadee
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Wirada Dulyaphat
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Werapath Somchit
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Duangrurdee Wattanasirichaigoon
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Maneerat Prakobpanich
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Chayada Tangshewinsirikul
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Garshasbi M, Wang Y, Hantoosh Zadeh S, Giti S, Piri S, Reza Hekmat M. Clinical Application of Cell-Free DNA Sequencing-Based Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, 13 and Sex Chromosome Aneuploidy in a Mixed-Risk Population in Iran. Fetal Diagn Ther 2019; 47:220-227. [PMID: 31487708 DOI: 10.1159/000501014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report the clinical experience and performance of plasma cell-free DNA sequencing-based noninvasive -prenatal testing (NIPT) as a screening method in detecting trisomy 21, 18, 13 (T21/T18/T13) as well as sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA) in a mixed-risk population in Iran. METHODS In a 2-year period between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, over 150 medical centers in Iran offered NIPT as clinical screening tests for fetal T21, T18, T13 and SCA. All NIPT positive cases were recommended to undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis. RESULTS 11,414 maternal blood samples were received for NIPT, for which 11,223 samples obtained NIPT results. Among 11,213 cases with confirmatory results, 94 T21, 39 T18, 8 T13, 15 XO, 6 XXX, 3 XYY, 5 XXY and 11,042 euploid cases were detected. The overall sensitivity of NIPT was 98.90, 100.00, 100.00, 90.91, 100.00, 100.00 and 100.00%, and specificities were 99.96, 99.97, 99.99, 99.96, 99.98, 100.00 and 99.99% for detecting T21, T18, T13, XO, XXX, XYY and XXY, respectively. CONCLUSION With a stringent protocol, our prospective large-scale multicentric nationwide study demonstrated that NIPT showed excellent performance as screening test for the detection of fetal T21, T18, T13 and SCA in mixed-risk pregnancies in Iran.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masoud Garshasbi
- Medical Genetics Department, DeNA Laboratory, Tehran, Iran.,Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
| | - Yicong Wang
- School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
| | | | - Sima Giti
- Medical Genetics Department, DeNA Laboratory, Tehran, Iran
| | - Solmaz Piri
- Private Fetal Medicine Practice, Tehran, Iran
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Alldred SK, Takwoingi Y, Guo B, Pennant M, Deeks JJ, Neilson JP, Alfirevic Z. First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD012600. [PMID: 28295158 PMCID: PMC6464518 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Kate Alldred
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- University of BirminghamInstitute of Applied Health ResearchEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - Boliang Guo
- University of NottinghamSchool of MedicineCLAHRC, C floor, IHM, Jubilee CampusUniversity of Nottingham, Triumph RoadNottinghamEast MidlandsUKNG7 2TU
| | - Mary Pennant
- Cambridgeshire County CouncilPublic Health DirectorateCambridgeUK
| | - Jonathan J Deeks
- University of BirminghamInstitute of Applied Health ResearchEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | | | - Zarko Alfirevic
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Alldred SK, Takwoingi Y, Guo B, Pennant M, Deeks JJ, Neilson JP, Alfirevic Z. First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD012599. [PMID: 28295159 PMCID: PMC6464364 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012599] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Kate Alldred
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- University of BirminghamInstitute of Applied Health ResearchEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - Boliang Guo
- University of NottinghamSchool of MedicineCLAHRC, C floor, IHM, Jubilee CampusUniversity of Nottingham, Triumph RoadNottinghamEast MidlandsUKNG7 2TU
| | - Mary Pennant
- Cambridgeshire County CouncilPublic Health DirectorateCambridgeUK
| | - Jonathan J Deeks
- University of BirminghamInstitute of Applied Health ResearchEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | | | - Zarko Alfirevic
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Manotaya S, Xu H, Uerpairojkit B, Chen F, Charoenvidhya D, Liu H, Petcharaburanin N, Liu Y, Tang S, Wang X, Dansakul S, Thomsopa T, Gao Y, Zhang H, Xu H, Jiang H. Clinical experience from Thailand: noninvasive prenatal testing as screening tests for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in 4736 pregnancies. Prenat Diagn 2016; 36:224-31. [PMID: 26748603 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4775] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2015] [Revised: 12/03/2015] [Accepted: 01/05/2016] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this article is to report the clinical experience and performance of massively parallel sequencing-based noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a screening method in detecting trisomy 21, 18, and 13 (T21/T18/T13) in a mixed-risk population in Thailand. METHODS In a 30-month period, 121 medical centers in Thailand offered NIPT as clinical screening tests for fetal T21, T18, and T13 in the mixed-risk population. All NIPT-positive cases were recommended to undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis. RESULTS A total of 4736 participants received the NIPT test, including 2840 high-risk pregnancies, either with advanced maternal age or positive serum biochemical tests, and 1889 low-risk pregnancies without conventional indications; 99.9% (4732/4736) of the participants with a median maternal age of 35 years old received reports, and 1.3% (63/4732) were classified as test positive, including 36 T21, 19 T18, and 8 T13; 82.5% (52/63) took prenatal diagnosis, and 11.5% (6/52) false-positive cases were observed. The positive predictive values for the detection of T21, T18, and T13 were 94.4%, 79.0%, and 87.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION With stringent protocol, our prospective large-scale multicenter nationwide study demonstrated that NIPT showed excellent performance as screening tests for the detection of fetal T21, T18, and T13 in mixed-risk pregnancies in Thailand.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Manotaya
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.,King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
| | - H Xu
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - B Uerpairojkit
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.,King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
| | - F Chen
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,Section of Molecular Disease Biology, Department of Veterinary Disease Biology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - D Charoenvidhya
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.,King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
| | - H Liu
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | | | - Y Liu
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - S Tang
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - X Wang
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - S Dansakul
- Life Science Lab Co., LTD, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
| | - T Thomsopa
- Life Science Lab Co., LTD, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
| | - Y Gao
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - H Zhang
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - H Xu
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| | - Hui Jiang
- BGI clinical laboratory-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China.,BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518083, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Alldred SK, Guo B, Takwoingi Y, Pennant M, Wisniewski S, Deeks JJ, Neilson JP, Alfirevic Z. Urine tests for Down's syndrome screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015:CD011984. [PMID: 26662198 PMCID: PMC7081127 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
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 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. The risk of a Down's syndrome affected pregnancy increases with advancing maternal age.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. 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 and second trimester urine markers for the detection of Down's syndrome. SEARCH METHODS We carried out 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 2011, Issue 7), 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 studied reference lists and published review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA Studies evaluating tests of maternal urine in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection. 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 (receiver operating characteristic) meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. We performed analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses. MAIN RESULTS We included 19 studies involving 18,013 pregnancies (including 527 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Twenty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of the following seven different markers with and without maternal age: AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), ß-core fragment, free ßhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), total hCG, oestriol, gonadotropin peptide and various marker ratios. The strategies evaluated included three double tests and seven single tests in combination with maternal age, and one triple test, two double tests and 11 single tests without maternal age. Twelve of the 19 studies only evaluated the performance of a single test strategy while the remaining seven evaluated at least two test strategies. Two marker combinations were evaluated in more than four studies; second trimester ß-core fragment (six studies), and second trimester ß-core fragment with maternal age (five studies).In direct test comparisons, for a 5% false positive rate (FPR), the diagnostic accuracy of the double marker second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age test combination was significantly better (ratio of diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR): 2.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 4.5), P = 0.02) (summary sensitivity of 73% (CI 57 to 85) at a cut-point of 5% FPR) than that of the single marker test strategy of second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age (summary sensitivity of 56% (CI 45 to 66) at a cut-point of 5% FPR), but was not significantly better (RDOR: 1.5 (0.8 to 2.8), P = 0.21) than that of the second trimester ß-core fragment to oestriol ratio and maternal age test strategy (summary sensitivity of 71% (CI 51 to 86) at a cut-point of 5% FPR). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Tests involving second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than the single marker second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age, however, there were few studies. There is a paucity of evidence available to support the use of urine testing for Down's syndrome screening in clinical practice where alternatives are available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Kate Alldred
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Boliang Guo
- University of NottinghamSchool of MedicineCLAHRC, C floor, IHM, Jubilee CampusUniversity of Nottingham, Triumph RoadNottinghamEast MidlandsUKNG7 2TU
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- University of BirminghamPublic Health, Epidemiology and BiostatisticsEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - Mary Pennant
- Cambridgeshire County CouncilPublic Health DirectorateCambridgeUK
| | - Susanna Wisniewski
- Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, Oxford UniversityOxfordUK
| | - Jonathan J Deeks
- University of BirminghamPublic Health, Epidemiology and BiostatisticsEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - James P Neilson
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Zarko Alfirevic
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Alldred SK, Takwoingi Y, Guo B, Pennant M, Deeks JJ, Neilson JP, Alfirevic Z. First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015:CD011975. [PMID: 26617074 PMCID: PMC6465076 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011975] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Kate Alldred
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- University of BirminghamPublic Health, Epidemiology and BiostatisticsEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - Boliang Guo
- University of NottinghamSchool of MedicineCLAHRC, C floor, IHM, Jubilee CampusUniversity of Nottingham, Triumph RoadNottinghamEast MidlandsUKNG7 2TU
| | - Mary Pennant
- Cambridgeshire County CouncilPublic Health DirectorateCambridgeUK
| | - Jonathan J Deeks
- University of BirminghamPublic Health, Epidemiology and BiostatisticsEdgbastonBirminghamUKB15 2TT
| | - James P Neilson
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | - Zarko Alfirevic
- The University of LiverpoolDepartment of Women's and Children's HealthFirst Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation TrustCrown StreetLiverpoolUKL8 7SS
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Alldred SK, Deeks JJ, Guo B, Neilson JP, Alfirevic Z. Second trimester serum tests for Down's Syndrome screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 2012:CD009925. [PMID: 22696388 PMCID: PMC7086392 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009925] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
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 retardation. 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. OBJECTIVES To estimate and compare the accuracy of second trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome. SEARCH METHODS We carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to May 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 18 May 2007), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 18 May 2007), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 18 May 2007), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDION (May 2007), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (May 2007), The National Research Register (May 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (May 2007). We studied reference lists and published review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA Studies evaluating tests of maternal serum in women at 14-24 weeks of 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 Fifty-nine studies involving 341,261 pregnancies (including 1,994 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Seventeen studies made direct comparisons between tests. Fifty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 12 different tests and maternal age; alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), total human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (βhCG), free alpha human chorionic gonadotrophin (αhCG), Inhibin A, SP2, CA125, troponin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PGF) and proform of eosinophil major basic protein (ProMBP).Meta-analysis of 12 best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed double and triple tests (involving AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG) significantly outperform individual markers, detecting six to seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. Tests additionally involving inhibin performed best (eight out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies) but were not shown to be significantly better than standard triple tests in direct comparisons. Significantly lower sensitivity occurred in women over the age of 35 years. 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 the accuracy of the sensitivity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Tests involving two or more markers in combination with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than those involving one marker. The value of combining four or more tests or including inhibin have not been proven to show statistically significant improvement. Further study is required to investigate reduced test performance in women aged over 35 and the impact of differential pregnancy loss on study findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Kate Alldred
- Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, The University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Alexioy E, Alexioy E, Trakakis E, Kassanos D, Farmakidis G, Kondylios A, Laggas D, Salamalekis E, Florentin L, Kanavakis E, Basios G, Trompoukis P, Georgiadoy L, Panagiotopoulos T. Predictive value of increased nuchal translucency as a screening test for the detection of fetal chromosomal abnormalities. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2009; 22:857-62. [DOI: 10.1080/14767050902994572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
10
|
Bahado-Singh RO, Choi SJ, Cheng CC. First- and midtrimester Down syndrome screening and detection. Clin Perinatol 2004; 31:677-94, v. [PMID: 15519423 DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2004.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Overall, Down syndrome detection capabilities have improved remarkably over the last 2 decades. Widely practiced first-trimester screening and less extensively elevated midtrimester urine screening promise even greater accuracy than was available a decade ago. Recently, the combination of first- and second-trimester screening has been reported to enhance discrimination of the Down syndrome fetus from normal cases. Although the advances are welcome, they present the significant prospect of multiple competitive algorithms with the risk of confusing patients, practitioners, and health care planners. The need for reasonable consensus has never been more pressing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ray O Bahado-Singh
- University of Cincinnati, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 231 Albert Sabin Way ML0526, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0526, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Nicolaides KH. Nuchal translucency and other first-trimester sonographic markers of chromosomal abnormalities. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:45-67. [PMID: 15295343 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 338] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
There is extensive evidence that effective screening for major chromosomal abnormalities can be provided in the first trimester of pregnancy. Prospective studies in a total of 200,868 pregnancies, including 871 fetuses with trisomy 21, have demonstrated that increased nuchal translucency can identify 76.8% of fetuses with trisomy 21, which represents a false-positive rate of 4.2%. When fetal nuchal translucency was combined with maternal serum free-beta-human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A in prospective studies in a total of 44,613 pregnancies, including 215 fetuses with trisomy 21, the detection rate was 87.0% for a false-positive rate of 5.0%. Studies from specialist centers with 15,822 pregnancies, which included 397 fetuses with trisomy 21, have demonstrated that the absence of the nasal bone can identify 69.0% of trisomy 21 fetuses, which represents a false-positive rate of 1.4%. It has been estimated that first-trimester screening by a combination of sonography and maternal serum testing can identify 97% of trisomy 21 fetuses, which represents a false-positive rate of 5%, or that the detection rate can be 91%, which represents a false-positive rate of 0.5%. In addition to increased nuchal translucency, important sonographic markers for chromosomal abnormalities, include fetal growth restriction, tachycardia, abnormal flow in the ductus venosus, megacystis, exomphalos and single umbilical artery. Most pregnant women prefer screening in the first, rather than in the second, trimester. As with all aspects of good clinical practice, those care givers who perform first-trimester screening should be trained appropriately, and their results should be subjected to external quality assurance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kypros H Nicolaides
- Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine, King's College, London University, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8RX.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
Increased nuchal translucency is the strongest single marker for chromosomal abnormality. Consequently, it is currently becoming established as the foundation of most early screening programmes for Down syndrome. In the absence of chromosomal abnormality, increased nuchal translucency has been shown to be associated with other congenital anomalies including cardiac defects. Several datasets have now reported this association and here these are reviewed to assess the effectiveness of nuchal translucency measurement as a screening tool for the prenatal detection of congenital heart disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jon Hyett
- Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine, King's College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London UK.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW An update of findings from studies on first trimester nuchal translucency screening. RECENT FINDINGS New first trimester markers can substantially improve efficacy of screening. When fully informed, preliminary data indicate that women prefer first trimester above second trimester testing. SUMMARY Recent reports on nuchal translucency screening reiterate the importance of standardization of technique and quality control as proposed by the Fetal Medicine Foundation in London. Effective quality control can be achieved through quantitative analysis of operator specific data. Three-dimensional ultrasound does not provide substantially higher success rates in obtaining reliable nuchal translucency measurements than two-dimensional ultrasound. New data confirm the previously reported association between increased nuchal translucency and increased rate of spontaneous fetal loss, genetic syndromes and a high prevalence (15%) of anomalies, among which cardiac defects are the commonest. Researchers agree that increased nuchal translucency ought to be an indication for specialized echocardiography. Promising data have become available on new markers that can enhance first trimester screening. It is estimated that when assessment of nasal bone and maternal serum analytes are taken into account, first trimester screening can identify 97.5% of trisomy 21 pregnancies for a 5% false-positive rate. It is stressed that parents need to be informed about the possible implications of screening before testing. Preliminary data indicate that when appropriately informed, women prefer first trimester above second trimester testing. Furthermore, the uptake of screening is likely to be relatively low among younger women.
Collapse
|