Polymerase-chain-reaction-based detection of fetal rhesus D and Y-chromosome-specific DNA in the whole blood of pregnant women during different trimesters of pregnancy

Noninvasive fetal sex determination using cell-free fetal DNA: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Noninvasive prenatal determination of fetal sex using cell-free fetal DNA provides an alternative to invasive techniques for some heritable disorders. In some countries this testing has transitioned to clinical care, despite the absence of a formal assessment of performance.

OBJECTIVE

To document overall test performance of noninvasive fetal sex determination using cell-free fetal DNA and to identify variables that affect performance.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review and meta-analysis with search of PubMed (January 1, 1997-April 17, 2011) to identify English-language human studies reporting primary data. References from review articles were also searched.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Abstracts were read independently to identify studies reporting primary data suitable for analysis. Covariates included publication year, sample type, DNA amplification methodology, Y chromosome sequence, and gestational age. Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers.

RESULTS

From 57 selected studies, 80 data sets (representing 3524 male-bearing pregnancies and 3017 female-bearing pregnancies) were analyzed. Overall performance of the test to detect Y chromosome sequences had the following characteristics: sensitivity, 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.7%-96.1%) and specificity, 98.6% (95% CI, 98.1%-99.0%); diagnostic odds ratio (OR), 885; positive predictive value, 98.8%; negative predictive value, 94.8%; area under curve (AUC), 0.993 (95% CI, 0.989-0.995), with significant interstudy heterogeneity. DNA methodology and gestational age had the largest effects on test performance. Methodology test characteristics were AUC, 0.988 (95% CI, 0.979-0.993) for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and AUC, 0.996 (95% CI, 0.993-0.998) for real-time quantitative PCR (RTQ-PCR) (P = .02). Gestational age test characteristics were AUC, 0.989 (95% CI, 0.965-0.998) (<7 weeks); AUC, 0.994 (95% CI, 0.987-0.997) (7-12 weeks); AUC, 0.992 (95% CI, 0.983-0.996) (13-20 weeks); and AUC, 0.998 (95% CI, 0.990-0.999) (>20 weeks) (P = .02 for comparison of diagnostic ORs across age ranges). RTQ-PCR (sensitivity, 96.0%; specificity, 99.0%) outperformed conventional PCR (sensitivity, 94.0%; specificity, 97.3%). Testing after 20 weeks (sensitivity, 99.0%; specificity, 99.6%) outperformed testing prior to 7 weeks (sensitivity, 74.5%; specificity, 99.1%), testing at 7 through 12 weeks (sensitivity, 94.8%; specificity, 98.9%), and 13 through 20 weeks (sensitivity, 95.5%; specificity, 99.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite interstudy variability, performance was high using maternal blood. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of Y chromosome sequences was greatest using RTQ-PCR after 20 weeks' gestation. Tests using urine and tests performed before 7 weeks' gestation were unreliable.

Prenatal RhD Testing: A Review of Studies Published from 2006 to 2008

The availability of noninvasive prenatal diagnosis for the fetal RhD status (NIPD RhD) is an obvious benefit for alloimmunized pregnant women. This review gives information about the performance characteristics of current diagnostic technologies and recent promising proof-of-principle studies. Notably, during the past 3 years almost twice as much samples have been investigated with NIPD RhD compared with the studies from 1998 to 2005. Thus we have now a lot more information compared with the knowledge before 2006. There is no doubt that funding of the SAFE Network of Excellence (2004-2009) from the European Commission within the framework 6 program has massively increased the worldwide experience in NIPD RhD. In 2009 European funding has been stopped. Because of this large investment from public funding sources, it is now the duty of policy makers (scientific boards, patient groups, physician organizations, and health assurances) to discuss if targeted antenatal Rh prophylaxis should be introduced in German-speaking countries or which additional data are required to make a decision and how these additional studies should be funded.