Response to Sistermans et al

Rare autosomal trisomies detected by non-invasive prenatal testing: an overview of current knowledge

Non-invasive prenatal testing has been introduced for the detection of Trisomy 13, 18, and 21. Using genome-wide screening also other "rare" autosomal trisomies (RATs) can be detected with a frequency about half the frequency of the common trisomies in the large population-based studies. Large prospective studies and clear clinical guidelines are lacking to provide adequate counseling and management to those who are confronted with a RAT as a healthcare professional or patient. In this review we reviewed the current knowledge of the most common RATs. We compiled clinical relevant parameters such as incidence, meiotic or mitotic origin, the risk of fetal (mosaic) aneuploidy, clinical manifestations of fetal mosaicism for a RAT, the effect of confined placental mosaicism on placental function and the risk of uniparental disomy (UPD). Finally, we identified gaps in the knowledge on RATs and highlight areas of future research. This overview may serve as a first guide for prenatal management for each of these RATs.

Confirmation rate of cell free DNA screening for sex chromosomal abnormalities according to the method of confirmatory testing

OBJECTIVE

To examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA screening for sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) in a large series of over 90 000 patients.

METHODS

Retrospective study based on samples that were sent to Cenata, a private laboratory which uses the Harmony Prenatal Test. The SCA high-risk results were stratified according to the method of diagnostic testing and according to karyotype result.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 144 cases. The CfDNA test indicated monosomy X, XXX, XXY, and XYY in 62, 37, 40, and 5 cases, respectively. The overall PPV was 38.9% (30.9-47.4), 29.0% (18.2-42.9) for monosomy X, 29.7% (15.9-47.9) for 47,XXX, 57.5% (40.9-73.0) for 47,XXY, and 80.0% (28.4-99.5) for 47,XYY). A total of 112 (77.8%) women with a high-risk result for SCAs opted for prenatal karyotyping. In this group, there were significant differences in the PPV if the karyotype was assessed by amniocentesis or by CVS: 29.5% vs 50.0%. This significant difference was driven by the monosomy X result which shows a significantly higher PPV in CVS (54.6% (23.4-83.3) vs 17.1% (6.6-33.6)). For the other SCAs, the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

PPV of an abnormal cfDNA test for SCAs is low, particularly for monosomy X. The confirmation rate depends on the type of confirmatory test.